@Aluzky
Yeah, agree. If a person finds him-/herself attracted to children sexually, feels it as an irresistible compulsion -- or maybe even less, just an annoyingly persistent preoccupation or fantasy -- it should alarm them enough to seek counseling. Everyone they told their secret to (well, not everyone, but a lot of people) would applaud them for doing something about it.
Why? Because adults should not be sexually attracted to children. Something's wrong. Way wrong. It shouldn't be an attraction at all. Not baby penis or pussy sex toys. Just... not at all. Something needs adjustment.
Gotta wonder why their protective "adult" instincts aren't kicking in? If you want to call something bestial, there it is. That's a real bestial compulsion, to have no recognition of the inappropriateness of introducing a child (meaning prepubescent) to sexual concepts that are not naturally part of their life yet.
That's might be the biggest distinction between zoophilia and pedophilia. Leaping ahead to a stage of sexual development the child isn't naturally "at" yet. Disrupting their psychosexual development -- and being incapable of recognising they are not at that stage. Anything sexual would be pushing a one-sided agenda. And that's abuse of a child by an adult. In no case would that kind of relationship ever be okay.
Yep. I'm seeing a distinction there that justifies persecution of child sex offenders while exonerating at least some zoophilia. I agree some interspecies behavior would be similar, but in those cases, it's equally wrong -- just as the rules for this forum state. Prurient interest in sexually immature animals is verboten here.
But yep. I'm going to make it my opinion now that child sex offenders are -- and should be -- a socially and legally persecuted, prosecuted, convicted and incarcerated class of criminals.
And anyone demonstrating interest in that sort of behaviour -- but having anime or sex toys that are "child" in nature -- needs to get themselves to psychiatric help.
Bulshit, it's entirely natural, sorry, so's rape btw, natural =/= right.
To be frank, being interested in the physical form of a child is irreverent,that's a matter of taste, or lack thereof, it is the physical harm, and lack of consent that is and should be at issue, otherwise you'll need to ban dwarves from having sex for being the size of an 8 year old.
It's also entirely natural to not have protective instincts, I don't have them, and I fucking hate the snotty little bastards, killing children other than your own is an evolved trait, it means your children and your genes are more likely to survive in the issuance of food shortages, although is is a competing trait to the protective one which grants safety in numbers, meaning if a predator attacks your children are less likely to be the one they take.
Chronophiles exist for all age groups, the elderly, middle aged, young, indeed I submit most or not all people are particularity attracted to the traits of 20 somethings.
Yet also have to consider what a child is, just because it is said that someone can or cannot consent does not necessarily make it true. Indeed, despite our instance on chronological solution to the issue of "consent"which has little to no baring to an individuals ability to do so, not that such ability is a constant, the fact remains, it is a matter of development, not of age.
Some of these individuals fuck kids do so because of the harm it causes, others because they have an inane need to to fuck a child without the desire to harm, others because they desire the form factor, which a doll perceptually an anamatroinic one can replicate with a reasonable degree of accuracy, or non-child porn,.
In many places the recognises that ages of consent are different for different categories, for family members or teachers, it may be 18, when normally 16, prison officers can only rape prisoner regardless of consent is given because of the potential for abuse, such potential exist with not just children but also the very old.
The fact children are small has nothing to do with the issue legally, if they were made of rubber, that aspect would have no problem, it is the fact it inflict physical and mental harm, the fact that it is rape. Is.
Children are purely a legal definition, bellow 18, why, because the US says so, and it pay for the UN, but if Italy was to say 5 year olds are of maturity, they are no longer children in a definitive sense.
Beyond that it's merely a perception, if you want to say when the person peaks and stops developing, then it's 21, but we already have that as age of majority, so it has to before then, it's entirely conceptual, its an idea, with no defined boundaries, are teens children, are they not? is it when the brains tops developing? at 18? if so why are we asking 16 year old to sit life changing exams that they can't possibly fully understand the consequences of as much as they later will? Why did we split kids up at 11 into manual and clerical professional groups?
Much of all this is cultural, not in terms of the ability to consent, although the minutia of it may be disagreed on, but in there of development, a french kid lets say sexually matures at 14, (for augments sake, this is pure conjecture), but a African kid on a farm, would ergo mature earlier, partly from having had reputability to help provide for the family in harsh conditions, and to slaughter their own food, and the repeated death of siblings.
And what would a spartan boy say to all of that, who would likely mature even faster, before he was physically read to have sex, is a child who is of sound mind and has the capacity to murder their own parents, with premeditated planing and understanding of the consequence not capable of consent?
Additionally children masturbate not all but some very diffidently, a whole generation of children was introduced to sexual pleasure they day they got a game controller with a rumble function. Does a child who discovers this early develop faster? Perhaps, but also perhaps not.
When even are people, because children are people, able to consent? What defines that fact? an understanding of the consequences? hormones put paid to that idea until 21, young people think they're invincible, upto this age, is it life experience? If so then why can 18 year olds in school with none of that fuck?
And what right to we have to tell people, you can't do this if they wnat to. We let the mentally deficient fuck even if they have the maturity of a 12 year old, women who cannot legally marry, can legally fuck, who can't legally raise children can fuck, teens who we say can't fuck are fucking each other in bushes and and uploading nudes tot he internet without prompting from anybody, and right out lying about how old they are with complete contempt for what we say. and the reverse is true, 19 year olds who couldn't put a washing on are pounding away at poon like a blacksmith on an anvil. and studys show us that 10% of the male population would fuck a teenager who is "under age" (this stat could be true of zoophiles, but we don't know)
The fact something does not sit comfortably with us does not matter. Granny porn disgusts me, but so what? I'm part of a group that disgusts people, (LGBT) again so what?
If we try to kill them, they'll hide, and we'll only know once the damage is done, if we treat them like rapists when they aren't or act like they can't be helped, they will believe it and act accordingly, we we punish them for seeking help by speaking out, they won't, a problem shared is a problem haved didn't come from nowhere and paedophiles dont have that option. support group have proven to be a bad idea as the worst of them drag the others down with them, and if we say" once a rapist, always a rapist", they will rape again, because why wouldn't they?
a Pedo in prison is safer than pedos outside of prison.
killing offenders might work, or it might make them feel more righteous, despite their victims views, they believe that such harm comes from the appearance of harm, and to an extend this may have some merit, treating someone like a victim is just more victimisation, yet, we celebrate wounded warriors, and they still kill themselves, so it's not the full story.
We are in danger of creating an underclass bellow us, that treats a inane, unaquired, (sometimes) unasked for, unconsenal trait, that they cannot get rid of and celibacy is a big big ask, possible, but most will fail.
We cannot eliminate them. But we can perhaps control them, through fear of justice, yes, but not terror for their lives when they are yet to do anything wrong, that merely cements their perceived zeal and righteousness.
There are 3 element to rape, and this relates to animals.
Physical Trauma
-Physical injuries
Emotional trauma
-being force into something you don't want to be, being powerless,
Social trauma
-guilt imposed by others, "how could you let yourself be defiled" "slut", "look at what you were wearing" "your poor husband"
--the difference between animals sex (some atleast) and rape is
Physical Trauma - this need not occur
Emotional trauma - for dogs, if they have the capacity, this seems to be par for the course, fucking each other is an assertion of dominance, and other than social standing it seems to have no long term effects, an the reaction seems to be similar to acceptable human admonishment, altough I am not sure of this.
Social trauma - in non monogamous species, this does not occur.
Now im a little iffy on penetrative sex with animals, because of point two, but certainly I can see no moral justification for merely presenting oneself to an animal and allowing ti to make a choice. Hell even "sex work" if a dog is happy to fuck you for peanut butter, what right do we have to say that isn't a fair trade?