Newest Members
GoodKiwi, Naeno, stillhere35, RKS, Albertus
12557 Registered Users
Today's Birthdays
cbob (61), Cgood91 (24), igotsunshine (41), lover_ez_ethan (28), Samuel (32), Shelatowie (52), tryin to cope jc (27)
Who's Online
4 registered (Still, 3 invisible), 17 Guests and 4 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Stats
12557 Members
73 Forums
64453 Topics
450200 Posts

Max Online: 418 @ 07/02/12 07:29 AM
Page 4 of 4 < 1 2 3 4
Topic Options
#332676 - 05/31/10 11:11 PM Re: Biological basis for pedophilia? [Re: Marinan]
catfish86 Offline

Registered: 10/27/09
Posts: 828
Loc: Ohio
These professionals seem to me to be uniquely biased and uninformed about pedophilia. Sounds like a canned attempt to use sophomoric science (word sophomore means "wise fool" which is a second year student who has learned enough to sound intelligent and thinks he knows but doesn't really understand) to excuse and somehow condone the behavior. I am here to tell you that even IF someone has a sexual orientation towards children, trauma specialists can literally show you the damage caused on brain scans. THE CHILDREN they prey on do not have a sexual orientation for adults. I sure as hell didn't want my dad and a caring preacher to fondle and play with me. While I am a christian fundamentalist in many respects, at least adult males having sex with other adult males are both participating of their own free will. I can't even tell you how old I was when I was first molested. I sure as hell couldn't have consented to it.

God grant me
The Serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
The Courage to change the things I can,
And the Wisdom to know the difference.

#332698 - 06/01/10 11:26 AM Re: Biological basis for pedophilia? [Re: catfish86]
kidneythis Offline

Registered: 11/08/09
Posts: 1558
Just to let you know the Eugenics movement is an entirely American invention. Hitler may have based a lot of his beleifs on it but it was Americans who invented it. In fact my abuse in that shelter was caught up in the tail end of the movement. I'm starting to realize that my family intentionally interfered with my mental development by neglect, lies and starvation, to make me seem dumb so I would get locked up in the feeble minded ward once in the place. They had a ward for retarded kids in the hospital the shelter was part of and most people still thought that what a kid showed outwardly indicated what they were entirely. In fact many still do.
The funny part is that if I hadn't been abused I wouldn't be short. I beleive I am short because of the starvation and abuse I endured. I never got to eat as much as I needed or wanted until I was 18. I never knew what it felt like to not be hungry or not to worry about food until then. My brothers are all right at or over 6 feet and they didn't miss a meal.

the lowering of the age of onset and the larger growth of people is and was always part of human potential. The realization of that potential has been made possible by the increase in nutrition and calories available to us as humans. In the early 20th century puberty set in at 14-16 for boys and 13-15 for girls generally, as most people were very thin and small. As the technology of farming and the economy took off so did physical development. We are after all animals and as animals our primary evolutionary goal is to reproduce. It is the same for all living things.
It isn't the chemicals used in farming themselves that are responsible but the nutrition and caloric content of the food they help produce that caused this increase in growth and the earlier onset of puberty. In fact most chemicals reduce fertility and feminize males who take them in. I think its called estrogen mimicking chemicals?
Thats physical feminization not mental.

Now for the biological basis and brain scans;
The very best that can be done with one of these is to establish a correlation. A correlation is saying that two things occured at the same time not that they are related or causative in any way.
Why? Because every single brain is wired differently. Yes certain areas are used for certain functions in most people but there are normally functioning people who are wired completely differenlty because of some congenital defect, or some trauma or????
There is no way that a scan can determine what reaction a person is having unless it is physical, and that is only a physical manifestation of whatever is going on inside which again cannot be known. You don't know if the person's mind is wandering and thinking of something else even if they say they aren't, or if the reaction is involuntary or unconscious, the fact is we can only measure the electrical impulses of biological functions. Unless and until there is a method of reading a persons thoughts its all pointless bullshit to discuss it in any but a theorhetical way.

The only people who think correlations mean something that should be acted on are the same types who think they "know" things that cannot be known. It is the antithesis of everything American and Western, human really, to think this way.
I regard it as a character defect that so many (people in general ala jerry springer) think it is ok to even think about trying to know or effect anothers thoughts. And to apply judgment to this person for the imagined offending thought. That can only be based on fear and insecurity. Normal free people who beleive in the freedom of man do not need to know and even want to know what another is thinking unless they are part of their lives. And even then they are ALWAYS aware that we can only know what a person tells us and what a person does, anything further is all imagination no matter how many correlative factors one can point to. Yes we can use these correlations to inform our personal behavior but should never use them to infringe on another.
The current examples that prove the point of this evolution in Western thinking and are the basis for the thinking that became America that I can point to immediately are the poor SOB who found that bomb at the olympics in Atlanta and the other poor SOB who the FBI was so sure commited the anthrax attacks and gave us the evil undermineing and wholly intentionally ambiguous expression "person of interest". Everyone just "knew" these guys did it in spite of the lack of evidence. They destroyed these men's lives based on an imaginary fear based reaction to correlative information.

This is the kind of crap you get when you just "know" something is true. Or you think you know what someone "really" means as if that adjective in front of mean makes mean mean more when in fact it completely destroys the meaning of mean and makes the entire statement ambiguous and open to whatever interpretation the strongest mind present wants it to fit.

By all means study away people but please the rest of us lets not forget we are human and fallible and we can only know what we see and hear ourselves everything else is based on beleif and trust in things we don't know haven't been corrupted unless we checked them ourselves.

So Biological basis may mean something different than orientation as I originally ass-u-me d but it still only will give a correlative indication. Please do not let your personal investment in the issue cloud your reason and condem uncounted innocent future people to be subject to all manner of personal invasions because they were unfortunate enough to have these correlative indicators.

As Mark Twain once quipped, history may not repeat itself, but it does rhyme.

#332702 - 06/01/10 01:08 PM Re: Biological basis for pedophilia? [Re: Marinan]
LandOfShadow Offline

Registered: 12/11/07
Posts: 684
Loc: Minneapolis, Minnesota USA
I'm all for research for the sake of a better understanding of pedophilia, BUT, BUT, BUT!

People always seem to think all of this offender stuff will stop CSA. I say it won't, won't, won't. Don't confuse this. Most CSA occurs in secret. Most isn't caught. No matter what we do or know about the offenders we catch will do anything about the ones we don't know about yet. Sure a small number of offenders are prevented from abusing--terrific--but it's a small fraction. Let's stop all of it.

THUS. The other option is to make kids "unabusable" so to speak. The victim and the perp are the only people who know about the abuse in most cases. One of them has to act to interrupt the abuse. Very few perps will come forward and ask for help, especially if they face prison. So that leaves the child. I want research into creating "pretective measures" for children. This seems so obvious to me now, and so key. The focus on offenders always seems to obscure this key observation.

When a kid immediately tells about some abuse, I want to know, "How did he/she do that!" Understand that. If a kid avoids abuse that's attempted, understand what leads a kid to do that! This seems to be the only way to truely stop CSA. Since parents and family abuse, this training also needs to come from outside the family somehow.

Et par le pouvoir d’un mot Je recommence ma vie, Je suis né pour te connaître, Pour te nommer

And by the power of a single word I can begin my life again, I was born to know you, to name you

Paul Eluard

#332768 - 06/02/10 11:44 AM Re: Biological basis for pedophilia? [Re: LandOfShadow]
kidneythis Offline

Registered: 11/08/09
Posts: 1558
I think you've got something there LOS

As Mark Twain once quipped, history may not repeat itself, but it does rhyme.

Page 4 of 4 < 1 2 3 4

Moderator:  Chase Eric, ModTeam 

I agree that my access and use of the MaleSurvivor discussion forums and chat room is subject to the terms of this Agreement. AND the sole discretion of MaleSurvivor.
I agree that my use of MaleSurvivor resources are AT-WILL, and that my posting privileges may be terminated at any time, and for any reason by MaleSurvivor.