By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Torillian on 28 June 2011
Edit Thread
sapphi_snake said:
Torillian said:

But the only physical evidence you have isn't a plan of child molestation like in the case of the terrorist attack, all you have is a fictional story written by someone else like if you tried to convict someone of terrorism for reading a story from a terrorist's point of view and enjoying it.  They are in no way the same thing.  A plan shows that the person was actually thinking of committing a crime against other people, the manga shows that he likes the idea of it, but you can't prove that he will then take that to the point of an actual plan against a real person.  Once he makes a plan and you can prove it feel free to convict him, but not until then.

 

BTW I'd like you to provide some links to these psychiatric definitions you've been claiming like pedophiles can't possibly control themselves and everyone who has any pedophilic thoughts is automatically included in that group.

Lawson L. (2003 September–November;). "Isolation, gratification, justification: offenders' explanations of child molesting". Issues Ment Health Nurs (6-7): (24): 695–705.

Mihailides S, Devilly GJ, Ward T. (October 2004). "Implicit cognitive distortions and sexual offending". Sex Abuse 16 ((4):): 333–50.

From Wikipedia:

Studying child sex offenders, a review of qualitative research studies published between 1982 and 2001 concluded that pedophiles use cognitive distortions to meet personal needs, justifying abuse by making excuses, redefining their actions as love and mutuality, and exploiting the power imbalance inherent in all adult-child relationships.[58] Other cognitive distortions include the idea of "children as sexual beings," "uncontrollability of sexuality," and "sexual entitlement-bias."[59]


The first is fine but the second shows that child sex offenders have a higher propensity for not being able to control themselves, not that they 100% can't control themselves as you have claimed, and the study is flawed because it only uses pedophiles that have actually commited a crime, so you've proven that people that commit sexual crimes have a higher "uncontrolloability of sexuality" response but you can't then blanket that over everyone with sexual thoughts towards children, and then even take that a step further towards anyone with sexual thoughts towards imaginary children.

You are seriously perverting these studies into something they aren't.  They don't prove anything with 100% certainty and unless you can be 100% certain then I don't want people to be punished for something that by itself has no victim or target.  Do people that like Lolicon have a higher chance of being sexual offenders?  probably.  Is it 100%?  obviously not.



...