Hebephilia

[Kraco]

... a mental illness that stems from an incompetence to understand/apply society's ethics.

Haha, that's a really funny statement. Although I don't condone having sex with or exposing to sexual situations individuals below the limit stated by the law (in Western countries, anyway), it's still outrageous to say people who don't agree with the society's ethics have automatically a mental illness. Even the common ethics of today were revolutionary a little while ago, just like you said yourself. So, a person 100 years ago (in many Western countries) would have had a mental illness for thinking men and women are (politically, socially) equal? According to your logic a grand portion of the citizens of the USA have a mental illness because they either accept or reject capital punishment, opposing the laws of their particular state?

I'd say pedophilia is a mental illness condition, the rest are just preferences that should be suppressed by the individual (just like they mostly are).

[Killa-Eyez]

I'd still say there's something wrong with you, even if you do suppress the urges. It's not natural for a grown up to treat kids like that. It messes them up, no matter what. So thinking in such way should already be a big no and if it's not, it's that failure of comprehension that leads me to believe a mental disorder is at hand (considering this individual to be raised under normal circumstances).

I don't consider people having sex with animals mentally in order. Like homophiles are "considered" normal human beings yet differ in parts of the brain with others, I believe this case to be the same. It's a mental condition. Whether it's accepted by society or not is a different story.

I base some of my morals on society's ethics and some not, but this is one I fully support.

[XanBcoo]

At what point did we say or show that we didn't understand those two concepts?

Please...

It's the sexual preference for 11-14 year olds. Not the act of having intercourse (consensual or not) with them. Some of you seem like you're mistaking Hebephilia for rape in both the consensual sense and the statutory sense.

By saying we should not fuck the mentally retarded, it effectively means that the mentally retarded should not be fucked. That they should not have sex.

Is that... not (unfairly) discriminating?

I understand that your argument in this thread hasn't been about the ethics of having sex with children, I was just addressing those points. I am quite sure you agree.

[Buffalobiian]

I don't consider people having sex with animals mentally in order. Like homophiles are "considered" normal human beings yet differ in parts of the brain with others, I believe this case to be the same. It's a mental condition. Whether it's accepted by society or not is a different story.

Wait.. so you go and define "mental disorder" by yourself rather than following medical definitions?

Adults with a sexual preference for minors have a mental illness that stems from an incompetence to understand/apply society's ethics.

Any German who thought differently about the Holocaust would be considered mentally ill and be put into concentration camps too? No wonder Hitler got that all going so smoothly.

What's wrong is wrong for a reason. Get with it or follow consequences.

Galileo was "wrong" about the Earth orbiting the sun. I suppose he had a mental disorder too.

@Xan: I have no idea what you're talking about now.

[enkoujin]

There's a difference in all of this and that is having sex with animals and children is not an idea that should be brought back because it was an idea of the past (rather than say, stem cell research, which is innovative and new).

There were many examples of people back in the 17th century (and before) who actively participated in hebephilia and society has progressively learned to move away from those taboo practices. Hell, one of Canada's founding fathers, Samuel de Champlain, married a twelve year-old girl and had to consummate her two years later, but you don't see many Canadians here wedding pre-pubescent girls.

Hebephilia isn't anything new that society nor its individuals should be pioneering. It's something the general populace has condemned and it will keep doing so long as humans have faith and/or morals - just like medieval medicine, quartering capital punishment, using leeches to "cure" diseases, the Miasma theory, racism and genocide.

[DarthEnderX]

For the average population, they think that anyone who goes for members of the opposite sex lower than 16 years of age are pedophiles (unless they are 3-4 years older than the party). Most of this population will argue that anyone under the age of 18 are off-limits to adults (~20+).

The reminds me of a Demotivational poster I saw.

It was one of those embedded chain ones that went.

[Congratulations, you are now a pedophile]
[[Actually, it's ephebophilia, pedophiles lust for prepubescencts]]
[[[The only ones who know that, are pedophiles and ephebophiles]]]

[Buffalobiian]

There's a difference in all of this and that is having sex with animals and children is not an idea that should be brought back because it was an idea of the past (rather than say, stem cell research, which is innovative and new).

There were many examples of people back in the 17th century (and before) who actively participated in hebephilia and society has progressively learned to move away from those taboo practices. Hell, one of Canada's founding fathers, Samuel de Champlain, married a twelve year-old girl and had to consummate her two years later, but you don't see many Canadians here wedding pre-pubescent girls.

Hebephilia isn't anything new that society nor its individuals should be pioneering. It's something the general populace has condemned and it will keep doing so long as humans have faith and/or morals - just like medieval medicine, quartering capital punishment, using leeches to "cure" diseases, the Miasma theory, racism and genocide.

Once again I must remind everyone that Hebiphilia is about preference. No one's talking about bringing it back. No one's talking about legalising it. No one's saying that their neighbour should adopt it (unlike the other camp).

It's about Shinta having a 20 year old wife but thinking "boy wouldn't it be nice if she was 12 again".

[Munsu]

And this reminds me of those tests where they take straight men, put a gay film and the majority of them show signs of arousal.

[enkoujin]

Maybe this thread should be locked.

This topic is so controversial and anger-inducing that it is easy for one to derail off-topic (such as myself there) and go off a tangent to talk, not about the original topic of preferences, but the impurities of the taboo and the effects and causes of actually committing the act than to think about it.

Restating opinion:

If you want to yank it, you can spank to it privately in your own residence or mind. Just make sure you're not actually doing the forbidden act with someone else or involving anyone else in one's fantasies (or actively advocating/supporting the act with donations or products).

[Sapphire]

No one is flaming. The thread goes on!

[Edort4]

Some one should flame for the mental hygiene of this forums. Reading things like: hey we aint talking about raping them is just that "I wish my wife was 12", totally normal, just average thinking. Involution is too much for me.

[Ryllharu]

On principle alone, this thread should be locked. This is not the kind of thread you want on a forum, no matter how maturely it has been discussed so far.

[dragonrage]

I agree. Is this what gotwoot has become or what these forums are for. The validation of perversions involving minors?

[Killa-Eyez]

Wait.. so you go and define "mental disorder" by yourself rather than following medical definitions?

Well, can you explain to me why pedophilia is, and hebe- and ephebophilia aren't mental disorders? Better yet, can those medical scientist?

Hebephilia being a disorder is an ongoing debate (says wiki) suggesting the definitions of chronophilia's mental disorders are probably decided by ethics and morals. There goes your medical definition.

Any German who thought differently about the Holocaust would be considered mentally ill and be put into concentration camps too? No wonder Hitler got that all going so smoothly.

If me labeling something a mental illness is the same as brainwashing someone to believe it to be, then the ones mentally ill were Hitler and his followers (I'm sorry if I'm being extravagant).

If an adult can't help him-/herself constantly wanting to have sex with minors, in my book you have a mental disorder. No matter the situation, it'll never benefit the underaged. If you don't get that; fuck a medical definition, you're coo-coo in the head. If you do get it, you're still loco, but hopefully won't act on it and will seek help.

Galileo was "wrong" about the Earth orbiting the sun. I suppose he had a mental disorder too.

LOL... really?

I have no idea what you're talking about now.

Likewise.

Once again I must remind everyone that Hebiphilia is about preference. No one's talking about bringing it back. No one's talking about legalising it. No one's saying that their neighbour should adopt it (unlike the other camp).

It's about Shinta having a 20 year old wife but thinking "boy wouldn't it be nice if she was 12 again".

Which is wrong.

[fireheart]

If me labeling something a mental illness is the same as brainwashing someone to believe it to be, then the ones mentally ill were Hitler and his followers (I'm sorry if I'm being extravagant).

I think your going off here and addressing something completely different, their point is that if everyone understands/apply society's ethics we'd still believe all those things since we wouldn't challenge them, black people would probably still be slaves and women inferior to men, it was after all part of society's ethics long ago but it got changed that doesn't mean people who disagree with society's ethics are mentally ill. Also going by your argument you yourself have a mental illness since you don't base all your morals on society's ethics only some and by default probably means everyone has a mental illness and we're all screwed up in the head. Also funny enough if we didn't challenge society's ethics we'd probably still be having sex with minors.

[Kraco]

Well, can you explain to me why pedophilia is, and hebe- and ephebophilia aren't mental disorders? Better yet, can those medical scientist?

Biologically it makes zero sense to try to breed with a partner not physiologically ready to produce offspring. Thus, it's exceedingly easy to label it, scientifically so, a mental disorder. However, once the partner is biologically ready to reproduce, it becomes a more muddy subject dependent on ethics. It's only due to ethics that the legal marriage age climbed up to 18. I could see hebephilia labeled a disorder these days, but with ephebophilia it's never going to happen. Just the differing ages of consent between countries (or even states) alone would make it laughable.

[Buffalobiian]

I agree. Is this what gotwoot has become or what these forums are for. The validation of perversions involving minors?

Suggestions on the grounds that this forum may be shut down due to possible violations of US laws is something worth considering. Your idea, I wouldn't. These forums are for discussing. It ranges from anime, manga and how police exercise their rights to what I eat everyday and why Assertn has so many posts. I believe Bud has already pointed out that he may lock this thread depending on how far towards the line this thread travels. but if you're complaining because you don't want to read this - don't read this.

@KE: Let's revisit.

I don't consider people having sex with animals mentally in order. Like homophiles are "considered" normal human beings yet differ in parts of the brain with others, I believe this case to be the same. It's a mental condition. Whether it's accepted by society or not is a different story.

Wait.. so you go and define "mental disorder" by yourself rather than following medical definitions?

Well, can you explain to me why pedophilia is, and hebe- and ephebophilia aren't mental disorders? Better yet, can those medical scientist?

Hebephilia being a disorder is an ongoing debate (says wiki) suggesting the definitions of chronophilia's mental disorders are probably decided by ethics and morals. There goes your medical definition.

That's the whole package. As for my reply:

[quote=KE]

I don't consider people having sex with animals mentally in order. Like homophiles are "considered" normal human beings yet differ in parts of the brain with others, I believe this case to be the same. It's a mental condition.

- You said you believe hebephilia to be the same case as "homophiles" (homosexuals?) in that their brain structure is different. You have not backed this up with a source. As such, coming to the conclusion that it's a mental condition in such a manner is only valid for your personal definition of a mental condition and not necessarily applicable for others who "believe" differently. If you had facts to support this, that would be another manner.

Hebephilia being a disorder is an ongoing debate (says wiki) suggesting the definitions of chronophilia's mental disorders are probably decided by ethics and morals. There goes your medical definition.

-Firstly, you just said that Hebephilia being a disorder is an ongoing debate, which contradicts your statement before that "It is a mental disorder."

-Next, you stated that the definitions of mental disorders are probably decided by ethics and morals. But, you stated earlier: "It's a mental condition. Whether it's accepted by society or not is a different story.".

Putting the two pieces together, you have contradicted yourself by saying that the definitions of a medical disorder are influenced and decided by ethics and morals, but then stated that Hebephilia is a mental condition whether or not it's accepted by society. The only way you have not contradicted yourself is if you also believe that ethics and morals are not dependant upon society..

All in all, it boils down to you believing Hebephilia being a mental condition because you think it is.

Well, can you explain to me why pedophilia is, and hebe- and ephebophilia aren't mental disorders? Better yet, can those medical scientist?

Kraco did that quite well.

If me labeling something a mental illness is the same as brainwashing someone to believe it to be, then the ones mentally ill were Hitler and his followers (I'm sorry if I'm being extravagant).

@Fireheart: couldn't have said it better.

No matter the situation, it'll never benefit the underaged.

What does benefiting your partner have anything to do with sexual preference?

What's wrong is wrong for a reason. Get with it or follow consequences.

Galileo was "wrong" about the Earth orbiting the sun. I suppose he had a mental disorder too.

LOL... really?

What are you trying to say here? That Galileo was wrong? Or not?

Once again I must remind everyone that Hebiphilia is about preference. No one's talking about bringing it back. No one's talking about legalising it. No one's saying that their neighbour should adopt it (unlike the other camp).

It's about Shinta having a 20 year old wife but thinking "boy wouldn't it be nice if she was 12 again".

Which is wrong.

See above regarding you basing right and wrong on your own personal (and at times groundless) beliefs.

@Xan: I have no idea what you're talking about now.

Likewise

I'm assuming you are referring to Xan and not myself.

[UChessmaster]

Wait, homosexuality is a mental condition because the brain has a different structure? that`s new to me.

As much as i`d like to debate about it, i`m going to go with what i was teached, there`s a book called DSM-IV that list all of mental "condition", that`s as far as i go.

[Killa-Eyez]

I think your going off here and addressing something completely different.

This was exactly my goal. Buff did the same so I decided to return the favor.

Their point is that if everyone understands/apply society's ethics we'd still believe all those things since we wouldn't challenge them, black people would probably still be slaves and women inferior to men, it was after all part of society's ethics long ago but it got changed that doesn't mean people who disagree with society's ethics are mentally ill. Also going by your argument you yourself have a mental illness since you don't base all your morals on society's ethics only some and by default probably means everyone has a mental illness and we're all screwed up in the head. Also funny enough if we didn't challenge society's ethics we'd probably still be having sex with minors.

My point exactly. Pedophilia is already a mental disorder so why wait for an official public medical definition for hebe- and ephebophilia? Let's challenge society's ethics and massively decide they are mental disorders.
About my argument; the definition of pedophilia's mental illness stems from society's ethics and morals. Therefore the example of my vision of the individual failing to understand the rationale and/or apply these specific ethics and morals (assuming the individual was raised with them) is to be diagnosed with a mental illness. I'm sorry if it came off wrong.

Biologically it makes zero sense to try to breed with a partner not physiologically ready to produce offspring. Thus, it's exceedingly easy to label it, scientifically so, a mental disorder. However, once the partner is biologically ready to reproduce, it becomes a more muddy subject dependent on ethics. It's only due to ethics that the legal marriage age climbed up to 18. I could see hebephilia labeled a disorder these days, but with ephebophilia it's never going to happen. Just the differing ages of consent between countries (or even states) alone would make it laughable.

True, but it still doesn't remove the fact that the label was based on morals and ethics, subjects we all can change overtime. Even ephebophilia can be labeled a mental disorder if there are sufficient people sharing that same vision.

..my reply:

- You said you believe hebephilia to be the same case as "homophiles" (homosexuals?) in that their brain structure is different. You have not backed this up with a source. As such, coming to the conclusion that it's a mental condition in such a manner is only valid for your personal definition of a mental condition and not necessarily applicable for others who "believe" differently. If you had facts to support this, that would be another manner.

That's what I'm basing it on, my morals and ethics, as pedophilia is based on the morals and ethics of society.
To reply to the subject of homophiles having different brain structure, read on to my reply to UChessmaster.

-Firstly, you just said that Hebephilia being a disorder is an ongoing debate, which contradicts your statement before that "It is a mental disorder."

Again, in my book it is.

-Next, you stated that the definitions of mental disorders are probably decided by ethics and morals. But, you stated earlier: "It's a mental condition. Whether it's accepted by society or not is a different story.".

Just to be clear: Only hebe- and ephebophilia will probably be decided "mental disorders" based on ethics and morals, as pedophilia already is. I take this manner of defining and use it myself to label the rest likewise, based on my ethics and morals. Whether it’s officially stated as a mental disorder is something else.

Putting the two pieces together, you have contradicted yourself by saying that the definitions of a medical disorder are influenced and decided by ethics and morals, but then stated that Hebephilia is a mental condition whether or not it's accepted by society.

Not a but these mental disorders (pedo-, hebe- and ehpebophilia).
And yes, in my opinion (which is not based on research or facts) you have a mental disorder if you have any of the three philia's, simply because I think it's unnatural for an adult to fuck minors. There's a reason why we're adults and they're minors. You protect children from adult situations, especially this one, for their benefit.

The only way you have not contradicted yourself is if you also believe that ethics and morals are not dependant upon society.

Sometimes, yes. Not necessarily. Personal ethics and morals are based on your own sense of right and wrong. Whether society agrees with me or not, I will always label it a mental disorder since the decisions for these philia's till now are not based on medical grounds but on a majority of ethics and morals. After it being socially wrong, extended research followed only to make it official in both legal and biological terms.

All in all, it boils down to you believing Hebephilia being a mental condition because you think it is.

It already is for myself and it should be for others, yes. As I said before, pedophilia was decided a mental disorder based on morals and ethics. Hebephilia is on debate whether it should or should not (be a mental disorder) but will probably also be decided in such a manner.
So I think of hebephilia and ephebophilia being mental disorders (and will always see it that way) simply because (again) I think it's wrong. And "I" can become "we".

What does benefiting your partner have anything to do with sexual preference?

A certain feeling of off-limits should already be present within these "preferences". A feeling of disgust and going against nature even. It off course has nothing to do with the preference but the preference shouldn't be there in the first place. It should simply never "come up".

What are you trying to say here? That Galileo was wrong? Or not?

I was rather being skeptical of you really comparing the two "wrongs" this way. You can turn a right into a wrong proven by facts or you can feel something to be wrong. The latter is what I was implying.

See above regarding you basing right and wrong on your own personal (and at times groundless) beliefs.

I don't see how it's groundless if I think it's a mental disorder based on me finding it not natural and having it fight my sense of right for neither the adult nor, especially, the minor for several reasons. Reasons I think you yourself can come up with, Buff.
It’s a ground based on my beliefs.

I'm assuming you are referring to Xan and not myself.

No, you. I didn't really get you at some points. Like the Galileo or the German p.o.v.'s, involving entirely different situations with no valid points to them at all.

You really like putting words into other people mouths.

Wait, homosexuality is a mental condition because the brain has a different structure? that`s new to me.

I'm not sure if it was the actual structure being different or parts of the brain being differently active compared to heterophiles. I believe this was also tested with serial killers. I saw it on Discovery Channel once.

[Buffalobiian]

I'm assuming you are referring to Xan and not myself.

No, you. I didn't really get you at some points. Like the Galileo or the German p.o.v.'s, involving entirely different situations with no valid points to them at all.

Point of the holocaust example: look at the shit that can happen when you fail to challenge society's views.
Point of the Galileo example: What's "right" and "wrong" isn't set in stone, nor should it be set strictly by society's standards.

Summary point: Challenging society's "right" and "wrong" instead of swallowing it doesn't mean you have a mental condition.

This was exactly my goal. Buff did the same so I decided to return the favor.

I used examples to illustrate a point. See above.

My point exactly. Pedophilia is already a mental disorder so why wait for an official public medical definition for hebe- and ephebophilia?

See Kraco's reply before yours.

About my argument; the definition of pedophilia's mental illness stems from society's ethics and morals. Therefore the example of my vision of the individual failing to understand the rationale and/or apply these specific ethics and morals (assuming the individual was raised with them) is to be diagnosed with a mental illness. I'm sorry if it came off wrong.

Allow me to use an example:
Some people are raised in countries which are dominated by a certain religion (Muslim countries for example). They're raised with, and expected to follow society's laws. One such law is that women are required to wear the Hijab in public places.

So since she's raised and bred with such and ideal within her society, she's got a mental condition if she wants (not DO, but WANT) to take it off and not wear it again?

This example is not off-topic and is a direct application for " individual failing to understand the rationale and/or apply these specific ethics and morals (assuming the individual was raised with them) is to be diagnosed with a mental illness."

Biologically it makes zero sense to try to breed with a partner not physiologically ready to produce offspring. Thus, it's exceedingly easy to label it, scientifically so, a mental disorder. However, once the partner is biologically ready to reproduce, it becomes a more muddy subject dependent on ethics. It's only due to ethics that the legal marriage age climbed up to 18. I could see hebephilia labeled a disorder these days, but with ephebophilia it's never going to happen. Just the differing ages of consent between countries (or even states) alone would make it laughable.

True, but it still doesn't remove the fact that the label was based on morals and ethics, subjects we all can change overtime. Even ephebophilia can be labeled a mental disorder if there are sufficient people sharing that same vision.

What is this "label"? The label of something being a mental condition?

What you basically said up there was "if enough people thought ephebophilia was a mental disorder, then it would be a mental disorder". Of course that's true. It's as true as saying if enough people believed the earth was flat, the earth is flat. That's how "true" things are from a social perspective.

..my reply:

- You said you believe hebephilia to be the same case as "homophiles" (homosexuals?) in that their brain structure is different. You have not backed this up with a source. As such, coming to the conclusion that it's a mental condition in such a manner is only valid for your personal definition of a mental condition and not necessarily applicable for others who "believe" differently. If you had facts to support this, that would be another manner.

That's what I'm basing it on, my morals and ethics, as pedophilia is based on the morals and ethics of society.
To reply to the subject of homophiles having different brain structure, read on to my reply to UChessmaster.

I never said you didn't have anything to back up your claim about homosexuals having different brain structures or patterns. I said you didn't have anything to back up your claim about hebephiles having different brain structures or patterns.

You said that "homophiles" have different brain structures. I believe hebephiles to also be the same." <- 2nd sentence is not based on any evidence other than you "guessing". THAT is what I was talking about.

Just to be clear: Only hebe- and ephebophilia will probably be decided "mental disorders" based on ethics and morals, as pedophilia already is. I take this manner of defining and use it myself to label the rest likewise, based on my ethics and morals. Whether it’s officially stated as a mental disorder is something else.

in my opinion (which is not based on research or facts) you have a mental disorder if you have any of the three philia's, simply because I think it's unnatural for an adult to fuck minors. There's a reason why we're adults and they're minors. You protect children from adult situations, especially this one, for their benefit.

. Whether society agrees with me or not, I will always label it a mental disorder since the decisions for these philia's till now are not based on medical grounds but on a majority of ethics and morals.

Summary: I (KE) will label these following philias (pedo, hebe, ephebo) as a mental condition because I think they are wrong. I will continue to think this way regardless of whether society does or not, and regardless of whether the wider definition and diagnosis for "mental condition" changes conforms.

Did I get that right? If so, then I must tell you that hebephilia not only becomes a "mental condition" "by your books" (ie they fit the requirements for a mental condition), but that it may also be the case that hebephilia is a "mental condition" "by your own definition of a mental condition".

Personal ethics and morals are based on your own sense of right and wrong

No, KE. Morals are personal. Ethics are social.

It already is for myself and it should be for others, yes. As I said before, pedophilia was decided a mental disorder based on morals and ethics. Hebephilia is on debate whether it should or should not (be a mental disorder) but will probably also be decided in such a manner.
So I think of hebephilia and ephebophilia being mental disorders (and will always see it that way) simply because (again) I think it's wrong. And "I" can become "we".

Again, morals are personal. Ethics are decided upon by the wider society. "I" certainly can become "we", but until that happens, it remains as "I". ie, you.

A certain feeling of off-limits should already be present within these "preferences".

Whether this feeling "should" or "shouldn't" be present was again, something you yourself came up with.

I was rather being skeptical of you really comparing the two "wrongs" this way. You can turn a right into a wrong proven by facts or you can feel something to be wrong. The latter is what I was implying.

In that case, you mean "wrong" to be something that is different from yourself and/or something that you dislike?

Like how "black" people felt "wrong" to "white people"?

See above regarding you basing right and wrong on your own personal (and at times groundless) beliefs.

I don't see how it's groundless if I think it's a mental disorder based on me finding it not natural and having it fight my sense of right for neither the adult nor, especially, the minor for several reasons.

"Groundless" was referring to the fact that you believed hebephiles to have different brain structures, which so far is unfounded. Thereby, groundless. Note that I did not say ALL your beliefs were groundless.

This issue came up due to you defining Hebephilia as a mental disorder when mental disorders are not decided by you, but society as a whole. Putting it into "KE's own definition of mental disorders - anything that I find to be wrong", is another matter. So far, however, it has not been clear that you are using the term "mental disorder" under your own rules.

No, you. I didn't really get you at some points. Like the Galileo or the German p.o.v.'s, involving entirely different situations with no valid points to them at all.

You really like putting words into other people mouths.

I made the assumption because you addressed nearly all of my post. By addressing what I said without saying "I don't get you", I assume you "get" me.

I (try) not to put words into people's mouths, I don't think I've done so thus far. By saying what I said (that I'm assuming youre talking about Xan), I'm letting you know that I'm basing myself on an assumption, and allowing you to tell me whether that assumption was right or wrong.

It's the same as saying "I'm not sure who you're talking about, but I think you're talking about Xan".





And something to think about again: Society once condemned and burned people for being lefties. Not-too-long-ago, schools forced students to write with their right hands, even if they were left-handed. Is it a mental condition to then want to write with your left hand?

And so, according to what you wrote before, you can think of it as a mental condition because society used to decide on that based on majority belief?