In one of the interminable threads that devolved into endless discussions of pedophilia a couple of months ago, I raised an academic question about whether those who were commenting could come up with a reason why pedophilia was "wrong" without relying on a Judeo-Christian cultural context. The history, I argued, was that in Greece and to a lesser extent in Rome, pedophilia in some forms was culturally acceptable; only those pesky Christians managed to radically change the culture.
For me it was just an academic speculation, but apparently I was much closer than I had ever considered possible.
In a recent interview with the Times magazine, Richard Dawkins attempted to defend what he called “mild pedophilia,” which, he says, he personally experienced as a young child and does not believe causes “lasting harm.”
Dawkins went on to say that one of his former school masters “pulled me on his knee and put his hand inside my shorts,” and that to condemn this “mild touching up” as sexual abuse today would somehow be unfair.
Child welfare experts responded to Dawkins’ remarks with outrage — and concern over their effect on survivors of abuse.
I'm just curious what people think? Even in the midst of the groping, fondling, and raping of kids, and hiding/covering up of the crimes which occurred among clergy of my faith, it was exceptionally rare that anyone actually tried to condone it as being harmless.
Laughs, do you prefer him in pirate regalia? That is the official uniform for the Flying Spaghetti Monster 'religion', after all. Actually he has a house around here (Vermont), so I'm told, and has appeared at the local diner once or twice - never say 'never'... Unless, of course you, want non-consensual sex.
Why do you call it 'unnatural'? From what I understand from my hetero friends, he is fairly desirable.
Well I dont really want to have unnatural sex with him - I dont have the desire to stick objects into any of his orafices.
I think I liked him best in Secret Window
Yeah, Johnny's cool no matter which way you look at it.
And I'm not willing to draw a line under any particular age.
Six years old? Eight?
But I think that the point Im trying to make is that, people dont die from not having their sexual desires met.
and also, I will admit that there is a difference between pedophiles (those who love children in an unatural way) and psychopathic child killers/abusers.
I heard one psychopath say that he knew he was a monster and that he had compulsions to do deliberate harm to children. Before he turned himself in he said that he just had to go out and kill one more child.
If someone feels it but never acts on it because they know it's wrong - that is a great person as far as I'm concerned. Someone who takes advantage of vulnerable children, making excuses like "she seduced me" is the scum of the Earth.
Yeah - That really bothers me Simon. Men who think like that have been to Thailand too much.
If someone feels it but never acts on it because they know it's wrong - that is a great person as far as I'm concerned
Indeed. But not everyone is a great person - some are just average and some are a little weak. Some of them may be able to be helped - don't you think we should try to do that before it becomes too late?
Strega - Who's your IT girl if you dont mind me asking?