Debate Guide: The violent sexual predator: Difference between revisions
The Admins (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
The Admins (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| (9 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
<blockquote><font color="green">''''' | [[File:Leeper.png|thumb|Florida Sheriff Bill Leeper poses next to signs he erected during the halloween sex abuse hysteria of the late 10s<ref>[https://www.news4jax.com/news/2021/10/26/trick-or-treating-safety-check-how-to-know-if-sex-offenders-predators-are-on-your-route/ News4Jax: How to know if sex offenders are on you're route]</ref><ref>[https://fstube.net/w/hY6EiP3wQULJcXMSd4tkzq FST copy of video]</ref>]] | ||
<blockquote><font color="green">'''''Let me tell you something about how these slime operate. Pedophilia is pathological narcissism let loose on the vulnerable; they live and they breathe, just to exploit the weak and needy. Psychiatrists will tell you <u>these men are literal reptilians</u>; their brain circuitry is so damaged, it "bypasses" the mammalian. While molesters might be able to play the "lover" role initially, this is recalled from reflexive memory, and it's a ruse. Children who have escaped the pedophile's clutches alive, will tell you the pedophile's lust is grasping, ravenous and destructive - an orgasmic violence <u>beyond his own control.</u>'''''</font></blockquote> | |||
There is [[Research: Psychopathy and abnormal psychology|no evidence]]<ref>[http://www.mhamic.org/characteristics/characteristicsintro.htm MHAMIc - Characteristics]</ref> to show affective sexuality is psychologically intertwined somehow with a destructive impulse. There are also [[Research: Sexual repression|many documented harms of sexual repression in childhood]], which might explain the combination of "reptilian" behaviors and puritanical beliefs among psychopathic attackers and murderers who target women and children. | |||
This outdated pathology perspective from the 1970s and 80s makes zero [[Debate Guide: Evolutionary logic|evolutionary sense]] concerning pedophilia, since: | |||
*Pedophilia is [[Research: Prevalence|relatively common]] in humans, common enough to cause severe harms if it is indeed destructive. | |||
*Pedophilia is [[Research: Prevalence|relatively common]] in humans (1-5% of men), i.e. common enough to cause severe and visible harms if it is indeed destructive and uncontrollable. | |||
*The younger members of a species are until a certain age, physically the most vulnerable. Therefore if (during any time of prolonged peace) a population's pedophiles repeatedly raped, maimed and killed their own children, said society would die out within a few generations. | |||
One who argues this position has clearly failed to consider the above factors in combination. They have also clearly not taken the time to browse thru [[Minor attracted community|MAP communities]], or if they have, they are deliberately seeking to misrepresent minor attracted people (we have sometimes personally witnessed this tendency in vigilante groups). Our [[Research|research resources]] on minor attraction document various studies that use samples from the online community. Pedophilia, is as its etymology suggests, a philia (love). Ask a pedophile, or someone who admits to feeling sexually attracted towards children, since they are best placed [[Debate Guide: Your arguments must be self-serving|to speak on these matters]]. | One who argues this position has clearly failed to consider the above factors in combination. They have also clearly not taken the time to browse thru [[Minor attracted community|MAP communities]], or if they have, they are deliberately seeking to misrepresent minor attracted people (we have sometimes personally witnessed this tendency in vigilante groups). Our [[Research|research resources]] on minor attraction document various studies that use samples from the online community. Pedophilia, is as its etymology suggests, a philia (love). Ask a pedophile, or someone who admits to feeling sexually attracted towards children, since they are best placed [[Debate Guide: Your arguments must be self-serving|to speak on these matters]]. | ||
Despite the relative popularity of the pathological model in the hysterias of the 70s, 80s and following decades, science debasing this theory has always existed, yet has been ignored in the clamor for a new folk-devil. In the fields of psychology and ethnography for example, it has often been observed that the more sex-negative societies, and/or those tolerant of violence, tend to have higher rates of sexual assault. Laboratory studies suggest that pleasure and violence exist in a reciprocal inverse relationship in which ''the presence of one is associated with the absence of the other''. In this sense, it is likely the repression of sensuality and sexual outlet, especially in adolescence does not only deny pleasure, but socially normalizes violence.<ref>[http://www.violence.de/prescott/bulletin/article.html Prescott - Origins of peace and Violence]</ref> As already demonstrated, there are no outstanding reasons to believe that preferential, non-expressed pedophilia differs from the rest of human sexuality in this regard. | |||
==See also== | ==See also== | ||
Nonwestern and Animal perspectives would appear to suggest | Nonwestern and Animal perspectives would appear to suggest the assumptions inherent to these arguments have more to do with human culture and horror fascination (fear of the unknown) than hypothetical innate mechanisms such as sexual pathology: | ||
*[[Research: Intergenerational Sexual Behaviors in Animals]] | *[[Research: Intergenerational Sexual Behaviors in Animals]] | ||
*[[Research: Nonwestern Intergenerational Relationships]] | *[[Research: Nonwestern Intergenerational Relationships]] | ||
*[[Research: Sexual repression]] | |||
==References== | ==References== | ||
Latest revision as of 15:16, 12 May 2024
Let me tell you something about how these slime operate. Pedophilia is pathological narcissism let loose on the vulnerable; they live and they breathe, just to exploit the weak and needy. Psychiatrists will tell you these men are literal reptilians; their brain circuitry is so damaged, it "bypasses" the mammalian. While molesters might be able to play the "lover" role initially, this is recalled from reflexive memory, and it's a ruse. Children who have escaped the pedophile's clutches alive, will tell you the pedophile's lust is grasping, ravenous and destructive - an orgasmic violence beyond his own control.
There is no evidence[3] to show affective sexuality is psychologically intertwined somehow with a destructive impulse. There are also many documented harms of sexual repression in childhood, which might explain the combination of "reptilian" behaviors and puritanical beliefs among psychopathic attackers and murderers who target women and children.
This outdated pathology perspective from the 1970s and 80s makes zero evolutionary sense concerning pedophilia, since:
- Pedophilia is relatively common in humans (1-5% of men), i.e. common enough to cause severe and visible harms if it is indeed destructive and uncontrollable.
- The younger members of a species are until a certain age, physically the most vulnerable. Therefore if (during any time of prolonged peace) a population's pedophiles repeatedly raped, maimed and killed their own children, said society would die out within a few generations.
One who argues this position has clearly failed to consider the above factors in combination. They have also clearly not taken the time to browse thru MAP communities, or if they have, they are deliberately seeking to misrepresent minor attracted people (we have sometimes personally witnessed this tendency in vigilante groups). Our research resources on minor attraction document various studies that use samples from the online community. Pedophilia, is as its etymology suggests, a philia (love). Ask a pedophile, or someone who admits to feeling sexually attracted towards children, since they are best placed to speak on these matters.
Despite the relative popularity of the pathological model in the hysterias of the 70s, 80s and following decades, science debasing this theory has always existed, yet has been ignored in the clamor for a new folk-devil. In the fields of psychology and ethnography for example, it has often been observed that the more sex-negative societies, and/or those tolerant of violence, tend to have higher rates of sexual assault. Laboratory studies suggest that pleasure and violence exist in a reciprocal inverse relationship in which the presence of one is associated with the absence of the other. In this sense, it is likely the repression of sensuality and sexual outlet, especially in adolescence does not only deny pleasure, but socially normalizes violence.[4] As already demonstrated, there are no outstanding reasons to believe that preferential, non-expressed pedophilia differs from the rest of human sexuality in this regard.
See also
Nonwestern and Animal perspectives would appear to suggest the assumptions inherent to these arguments have more to do with human culture and horror fascination (fear of the unknown) than hypothetical innate mechanisms such as sexual pathology:
- Research: Intergenerational Sexual Behaviors in Animals
- Research: Nonwestern Intergenerational Relationships
- Research: Sexual repression