14 Apr 10
Originally posted by Proper KnobWell, I would have thought the word "boys" had made it clear that I was referring to male children; but I guess I could have been a little less ambiguous.
Phew, this line you wrote was a little ambiguous.
As for linking homosexuality to molesting boys, yes, there's probably a connection; but so what?
14 Apr 10
1 edit
Originally posted by sh76
[b]First of all molesting children has nothing to do with sexual orientation in the sense of being homosexual or heterosexual. It has only to do with the fact with being sexually aroused by children.
Well, I wasn't using the term "orientation" "in the sense of being homosexual or heterosexual." I was using it in the sense that includes the proclivity to that he doesn't have sex with women because he's a Priest, and not because he's gay[/b]
Well, I wasn't using the term "orientation" "in the sense of being homosexual or heterosexual." I was using it in the sense that includes the proclivity to molest children.
You better use words in the way they are normally used or confusions like this will be very normal.
Let us assume that there are gay priests in the catholic Church just for the sake of argument. In that case why don't they have sex between them? Why do they target children repeatedly during large periods of time?
Wouldn't be easier for this homosexual priests to get together and have sex between them?
The fact is that homosexuality, heterosexuality and pedophilia don't have to be related in any way.
In the way that they're not expected to be going out and having sex.
Assuming that the said persons are homosexual: They embark on a life where sex is supposed to be ruled out. They embark on a life were homosexuality is reviled, despised and derided and they are supposed to worry about their sexual orientation...
If you assume that option c) is the most likely outcome to your initial scenario what you're saying is that an homosexual that lives in a homophobic society and he knows he's gay would prefer moving to a homophobic society while still knowing that he is gay...
Sorry but I don't buy any of that.
"Do you think I'm the first person to have ever thought of this trichotomy?"
Spare me of ad populum arguments please.
http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/facts_molestation.html
Pedophilia and child molestation are used in different ways, even by professionals. Pedophilia usually refers to an adult psychological disorder characterized by a preference for prepubescent children as sexual partners; this preference may or may not be acted upon.
child molestation and child sexual abuse are used to describe actual sexual contact between an adult and someone who has not reached the legal age of consent.
Although the terms are not always applied consistently, it is useful to distinguish between pedophiles/hebephiles and child molesters/abusers. Pedophilia and hebephilia are diagnostic labels that refer to psychological attractions. Not all pedophiles and hebephiles actually molest children; an adult can be attracted to children or adolescents without ever actually engaging in sexual contact with them.
Child molestation and child sexual abuse refer to actions, and don't imply a particular psychological makeup or motive on the part of the perpetrator. Not all incidents of child sexual abuse are perpetrated by pedophiles or hebephiles; in some cases, the perpetrator has other motives for his or her actions and does not manifest an ongoing pattern of sexual attraction to children.
Another problem related to terminology arises because sexual abuse of male children by adult men2 is often referred to as "homosexual molestation." The adjective "homosexual" (or "heterosexual" when a man abuses a female child) refers to the victim's gender in relation to that of the perpetrator. Unfortunately, people sometimes mistakenly interpret it as referring to the perpetrator's sexual orientation.
The distinction between a victim's gender and a perpetrator's sexual orientation is important because many child molesters don't really have an adult sexual orientation. They have never developed the capacity for mature sexual relationships with other adults, either men or women. Instead, their sexual attractions focus on children – boys, girls, or children of both sexes.
Other researchers have taken different approaches, but have similarly failed to find a connection between homosexuality and child molestation. Dr. Carole Jenny and her colleagues reviewed 352 medical charts, representing all of the sexually abused children seen in the emergency room or child abuse clinic of a Denver children's hospital during a one-year period (from July 1, 1991 to June 30, 1992). The molester was a gay or lesbian adult in fewer than 1% in which an adult molester could be identified – only 2 of the 269 cases (Jenny et al., 1994).
14 Apr 10
Originally posted by adam warlockThe molester was a gay or lesbian adult in fewer than 1% in which an adult molester could be identifiedWell, I wasn't using the term "orientation" "in the sense of being homosexual or heterosexual." I was using it in the sense that includes the proclivity to molest children.
You better use words in the way they are normally used or confusions like this will be very normal.
Let us assume that there are gay priests in the catholic Churc ...[text shortened]... identified – only 2 of the 269 cases (Jenny et al., 1994). [/quote]
it seems that the catholic church is not only bucking the trend, but evidentially making a mockery of such a report.
14 Apr 10
Originally posted by USArmyParatrooperI could see the punchline coming from halfway through, but it's still a good one. 🙂
A priest and a rabbi are walking down the street and they both see a 12 year old boy. The priest turns to the rabbi and says, "hey! I have a great idea. Let's screw that boy over there."
The rabbi looks shocked and confused and says, "out of what?"
14 Apr 10
Originally posted by USArmyParatrooperHilarious.
A priest and a rabbi are walking down the street and they both see a 12 year old boy. The priest turns to the rabbi and says, "hey! I have a great idea. Let's screw that boy over there."
The rabbi looks shocked and confused and says, "out of what?"
14 Apr 10
Originally posted by adam warlockSo your hypothesis is that otherwise straight people are driven to molest children because they have no other sexual outlet?Well, I wasn't using the term "orientation" "in the sense of being homosexual or heterosexual." I was using it in the sense that includes the proclivity to molest children.
You better use words in the way they are normally used or confusions like this will be very normal.
Let us assume that there are gay priests in the catholic Churc ...[text shortened]... identified – only 2 of the 269 cases (Jenny et al., 1994). [/quote]
14 Apr 10
Originally posted by sh76I think what he's trying to say is that instead of this:
So your hypothesis is that otherwise straight people are driven to molest children because they have no other sexual outlet?
People tend to become Priests because they're gay or pedophiles; not the other way around.
You should have wrote this:
People tend to become Priests because they're pedophiles; not the other way around.
14 Apr 10
Originally posted by sh76I already said that I don't fall for that fallacy. I'll tell my position once again (which you'd know if you've read what I wrote)
So your hypothesis is that otherwise straight people are driven to molest children because they have no other sexual outlet?
Sexual orientation is independent of feeling sexual aroused by children.
It may be that the priests are straight and are abusing boys.
It may be that that the priests are are gay and are abusing children.
It may be that the priests are sexually aroused by children and are abusing children.
I think that the most likely possibility is the third one, but to assert that the priests are homosexual and rape little boys for that is just pure ignorance.
If you don't read the article I linked in its entirety at least read the bits I quoted and bolded so that you can see where your mistakes are coming from.
14 Apr 10
1 edit
Originally posted by PalynkaWell, even if homosexuality is completely completely unrelated to molesting boys (which I'll grant for the sake of argument), I still think the first statement is true, even if not germane to this issue.
I think what he's trying to say is that instead of this:
People tend to become Priests because they're gay or pedophiles; not the other way around.
You should have wrote this:
People tend to become Priests because they're pedophiles; not the other way around.
In much of society, there's still a stigma to being gay. If people can avoid the stigma by becoming a Priest, I would imagine that some would take advantage of that opportunity.
14 Apr 10
Originally posted by sh76How are they avoiding the stigma of being gay by moving to a society that openly vilifies homosexuality?
In much of society, there's still a stigma to being gay. If people can avoid the stigma by becoming a Priest, I would imagine that some would take advantage of that opportunity.
Would you rape small girls just for being constantly in the middle of them. Do you think that most heterosexual males would rape small girls just for being in the middle of them?
Why don't these "gay" priests have sex between them and rape children repeatedly?
14 Apr 10
Originally posted by sh76But if you agree it's not germane to the issue then the link between homosexuality and priest pedophilia is severed. Isn't that what adam is arguing for?
Well, even if homosexuality is completely completely unrelated to molesting boys (which I'll grant for the sake of argument), I still think the first statement is true, even if not germane to this issue.
In much of society, there's still a stigma to being gay. If people can avoid the stigma by becoming a Priest, I would imagine that some would take advantage of that opportunity.
14 Apr 10
Originally posted by PalynkaNo, no, no. I also can't see pedophiles making the conscious decision of becoming priests just for their sexual desires.
I think what he's trying to say is that instead of this:
People tend to become Priests because they're gay or pedophiles; not the other way around.
You should have wrote this:
People tend to become Priests because they're pedophiles; not the other way around.
Of course I'm totally taking this out of my @ss and have nothing to offer for its substantiation other than "I'm just guessing".
14 Apr 10
Fuel to the fire...
I think most peds enter into fields wherein their private thoughts will realize the greatest concentration of stimulation. This explains both priests and teachers and/or others in public school administration. Most folks are unaware of the fact that (at least here in the US) public schools make priests look like, well, altar boys in the field of child fiddling. The numbers are so disproportionate as to be laughable: some studies have put the rate of molestation at the hands of teachers/principals/janitors upwards of 100 times the amount of those for clergy.
I think peds are fixated on youth as recipients of their perversion for more sophisticated reasons then they may even be able to articulate in their own minds. Namely, it isn't simply the 'blank slate' condition of youth which attracts a ped, as much as the innate understanding that a youth is less likely to process the acts in any type of cogent fashion, and is therefore even less likely to 'rat them out,' so to speak. Acting upon their perversions with an adult is fraught with exposure--- the very thing which would kill the private nature of their thrill.
I think peds tend to repeat actions which were perpetrated upon them, for two reasons: to pay themselves back for their previous 'crime' of being naive enough to not say anything when it happened to them, as well as for enjoying the attention they received when the roles were reversed.
I think the situation is about as lonely, sad and dehumanizing as the human condition can get. But then again, our depravity has surprised me before...
14 Apr 10
Originally posted by adam warlockBy negating their homosexual impulses when they take the vow of celibacy. Going into the closet is not unheard of, this is just another outlet which some gay people may prefer instead of trying to live a heterosexual life.
How are they avoiding the stigma of being gay by moving to a society that openly vilifies homosexuality?
Would you rape small girls just for being constantly in the middle of them. Do you think that most heterosexual males would rape small girls just for being in the middle of them?
Why don't these "gay" priests have sex between them and rape children repeatedly?