Sexual Relationships
+1 y

Why is the "born this way" argument not viable for pedophiles, necrophioles, zoophiles and so on?

i don't wanna condone pedophilia, necrophilia and zoophilia at all but i do wanna think about this without any bias or prejudice. so if you find yourself triggered by even thinking of the words mentioned, don't answer this question and go to your local safe-space to seek shelter from uncomfortable thoughts that may come up.

so we keep arguing that peoples sexuality as well as sexual identity and sexual desires are genetic or inherent and not learned, impossible to change and since it's not a personal choice, it's not in the responsibility of the individual, so we have to just accept it right? so we have accepted that being lesbian, bisexual, gay, trans, queer and many more is ok and totally fine.
we have accepted that self identifying as opposite gender, genderless or even something that isn't even human is not only ok but should be accepted by everyone that has no personal experience with this stuff too.
having said that, why is being a pedophile, necrophile and zoophile not ok? Can they change their desire or identity?

i fully understand that children, animals and dead people can not give consent to sexual intercourse and i am against allowing sexual activities involving them but from a logical standpoint, i don't understand completely. i'm just trying to discuss our social norms from the perspective of the individual and ask, why we come to assume that sexuality is not a free will choice, yet we blame pedos for being pedo, necrophiles for being necro and so on as if they could decide to stop that. why can we not have same "acceptance" standards for every sexuality? i'm not saying we should allow them to have sex with children, animals or corpses. i'm just saying: why not accept and stop demonizing their sexual identity?

why have we stopped seeing gender disphoria as a "disorder" or an "illness" when with the same argument we stopped donig that, we would logically have to stop seeing pedophiles, zoophiles or necrophiles as sick or ill?
0 0

Superb Opinion

  • All forms of attraction to anything period, are the result of a person's genetics, thus no form of attraction is their fault.

    Scientifically speaking, pedophilia, necrophilia, zoophilia, and all other forms of sexual attraction to unsafe things, are genetic disorders, because even if you insert morality:
    1. Sociopathy is also a genetic disorder.
    2. Mental retardation is also a genetic disorder.
    And those 2 things are what "evil" is.
    Granted those 2 things are actually like thousands of variants, but still.

    We don't like to think about it, because we like the convenience of blame, but the worst things imaginable that people have done, they did so because their genetics and environment drove them to be the person that they are, even people as dangerous as adolf hitler.

    Free will is a sort of illusion, you get some variance of choice to handle what you are dealt yes, but ultimately we are all victims to how our genes interact with our environments, and even those choices are just your genes talking.

    I'm only kind hearted because my genetics allow for that, I'm only attracted to adults because my genetics allow for that, I'm lucky.

    Some genetic setups just happen to be dangerous to others even under zero stress situations. Life is a crapshoot.

    • i'm not sure if "scientifically speaking" that is true. but assuming it is: why are homosexuality and genderdysphoria not considered "disorders" anymore? or is it just a deluded society of idiots that prefers feel good terminology over the truth?

    • A genetic disorder is just a genetic combination that inhibits successfully coexisting with society, this can be a genetic disease, but it can also simply be a not tolerated genetic variant that isn't diseased, but is dangerous. In the case of the pedophilia, necrophilia, and zoophilia, they aren't tolerated because they lead to hazardous outcomes, some of which result in diseases, death, mental manipulation, etc. Typically, being gay or thinking you are in the wrong body, do not lead to the harming of others, so it's not disorderly, thus not a disorder, though a time existed when this was thought to be otherwise.

    • Simply put, it's based off threat assessment as to what people consider a disorderly conduct, and because we like to place blame and get revenge, rather than actually fix problems, people don't want to hear that a person who wants to hump a dog, child, or corpse, is genuinely mentally impaired (because wanting to do those things is literally insane). Because it makes both parties a victim to point that out, and that makes people uncomfortable, and uncertain what to do about the problem. When our dog or cat or toddler does something stupid or dangerous, we feel concern, we tell them no, but we don't cull them, even if it was really bad, because we deem them incapable of the responsibility of assessing dangers or understanding why something is wrong. But when an adult falls short of that capability, we cull them, because we incorrectly assume that physical maturity creates sanity. This really has more to do with how adults are treated than anything else. It makes sense but also doesn't. there are cases where the danger level is so high that self preservation demands that person be removed from society, and there are cases where that measure isn't appropriate, but is done anyway. But in either case, the perp is also the victim, even the sadistic ones, because their genes are why they are sadistic, and it doomed them from ever having a normal life, just like it did their victims. It's quite a distressing topic to think about really, and I, like many others, do not know what could be done to prevent those kinds of minds from being created to begin with.

Most Helpful Guy

  • The entire problem is that leftist morality is based on feeling good and thinking that the most important thing is not to hurt someone's feelings. Once one makes feelings the standard then anything goes. It's just a matter of time. You are seeing the fire on the lawn and asking why isn't the house on fire... well just wait long enough, without somebody putting that fire out, and that house will be on fire.

    The feel good, good intentions of misguided people is exactly why we see soaring crime rates in many of the biggest blue state cities in the U. S. right now.

    • well this is specially tragic, cause by the compulsed political correctness nonsense, you actually murder genuine kindness and virtute. being a good person has no value, if you don't have the option to be a bad person.

Most Helpful Girls

  • It is an argument now based on a new study.

    I just heard yesterday that the study has proven that there is a difference between a child molester and a pedophile.

    It said that most pedophiles are born with a gene that makes them such and they can not help themselves, only child molesters can.

    I also think this may be a fake study to excuse their behavior.

    • really? you need a "study" to know that "child molestation" is different from being a pedophile? to me that was kind of clear just from the word. i mean you can be heterosexual and still never had sex. common sense. no need for a degree to know xD

    • i mean when i say i'm heterosexual that doesn't "mean" that i have fucked women. it only means that i like that.

  • I understand your prospective, but when it comes down to it, lesbian, bisexual, gay, trans, queer etc aren't hurting anyone. Pedophile, necrophile and zoophile take advantage of the helpless and dead which is horrendously depraved. They know between right and wrong and their disregard for anything but their own need isn't condonable nor exceptable.

    • Thanks for trying to have a rasonable discussion. i really appreciate that, as it's not easy around this topic. i mean i understand harming children is not ok. but not every sexual interaction that is theoretically possible with a minor is inherently harmful. and how do you determine that an animal does not consent and is harmed? and who is harmed or hurt in the case of a dead person? i totally agree that it is morbid. i mean less so than thinking you're the opposite gender or liking the same gender sexually but it is all morbid just to different degrees of morbidity so to speak right? and if thinking you're the opposite gender despite of your physical manifestation or if you desire the same gender sexually is NOT morbid at all, then why is wanting sex with children, animals or dead people morbid? like i do have the same feelings about those questions that you probably do have. it just feels wrong. i know we're not supposed to feel that "being gay, lesbian or trans" is wrong but it still feels like that to me and society has taught me to not think of it as "bad". and i don't see why this "not thinking of it as bad" should not apply to thoseother things. keep in mind: there's a difference between saying "being necrophile, pedophile and zoophile is ok" and actually allowing or condoning suchs exual acts. i wanna separate that conceptionally.

    • https://youtu.be/2B_Yw-JAnuw

Scroll Down to Read Other Opinions

What's Your Opinion? Sign Up Now!

Related Questions

He goes soft with me?
Women, if you were men would you care about women's body count?
Why couples like shower sex?
Is okay when our boyfriend touches us down there?

What Girls & Guys Said

0 4

  • The difference for me is pedophiles, zoophiles and necrophiliacs are committing non-consensual acts when they “act on” their desires. The LGBTQ+ community isn’t harming anyone simply by being themselves. I consider pedophilia, for example, to be a paraphilia, rather than an orientation. People should definitely have the ability to get help without fearing consequences, and it might be positive to approach them with an attempt to understand, rather than automatic condemnation, if they haven’t harmed another person. However, if they do, they should experience the consequences for their actions.

    • hey, first of all thank you for giving a rational, non triggered response. this isn't trivial, as most people on here are unable to do this. so i wanna comment on what you said. there's 2 components i tried to address here. first is "allowing of sexual acts", which i completely agree that non consensual sexual acts as you worded it should be and stay forbidden. though maybe "consent" can be redefined. why can a child consent to having candy (even though it doesn't the understand the consequences of eating candy) while not understanding the consequences is the reason we say children can not consent to sex? i mean giving a child candy can be framed as harmful. likewise they can enjoy physical stimulationor tasting candy. so why is one ok but not the other? this is just not so obvious to me. same with animals. why can they not consent to have sex with a human? i mean they experience arousal and sexual pleasure and maybe there's ways to tell whether they wanted it or not? and then why do dead people need to consent? a dead corpse isn't a sentient being. so it's more of a thing that doesn't even need "consent" right? like nobody will stop you from shoving your dick into a frozen turkey right? like you're not asking inanimate objects like dildos or ona-holes for consent to have sex with you right?

    • the second aspect is the acceptance of individual desires. independed from the question of "if we should allow such sexual interactions" is the question of "how should we think about someone desiring those thigns? and i feel likewe have come to accept lgbtq+ stuff as "normal and healthy" with reasoning that actually would also apply to necrophilia, pedophilia and zoophilia. so why do we see those 3 as evil but gay, lesbian, bi, trans, queer and so on as "not evil"? i mean at the very least we should actually say that necrophilics, pedos and zoophiles can't help their sexual desires and we should fiond ways in which we can liberate them to live their sexual desires without harming anyone. maybe by allowing the use of animated pornography? I don't know. i'm just saying that we're suppressing their sexual desires and we understand that this feels bad. so can there be a solution that helps them without actually harming someone?

    • Psychologically speaking, children cannot consent to sex like they can to candy and popcorn, for example. Many children who experience statutory rape meet the criteria for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), and I am aware other trauma-based disorders exist as well. There’s a lot of other things children cannot consent to because they don’t completely understand them as well. Speaking more on your examples, there are lots of parents who teach their children the values of healthy eating and the impact of food on your health. I think the problem people have with zoophilia is we don’t know for sure if an animal is consenting to sexual activity. Animals are also a different species, so that’s not going to be viewed in a positive light. As for corpses, it’s more about respecting their memory and surviving family members. I, personally, don’t care about necrophilia if you receive consent prior to death and/or the person in charge of the body is fine with it (family/friend/surviving spouse).

    • Show All

  • It is, but the difference is that pedophiles, necrophiles, and zoophiles don’t have consent and can’t have consent (children can’t consent, nor dead people or animals). People who are part of LGBTQ aren’t hurting anyone or doing anything with them without consent.

    • My view is that we need to find ways to help pedophiles integrate into society while managing these feelings in a way that doesn’t hurt children.

    • well you don't need consent for "desiring" sex with children, animals or corpses. just to actually do it. but we harshly judge people for having those desires even though we know it's not even their fault... like why is it so easy to acknowlegde that with lgbtq?

    • like shouldn't be more supportive of people who have those desires and NOT act on it rather than just lumping them in with those that actually do act on it?

    • Show All

  • First of all, pedophilia cannot be a sexuality since kids grow up and such relationships are unsustainable. Also children cannot consent so it is rape, not a sexuality.

    Being gay is caused by parts of your brain being more like the opposite sex then your own sex iirc. Being gay, bi or whatever is completely harmless.

    • The concept of "sexuality" does not concern Moral correctness or sustainable rationality. It merely concerns what you feel sexually attracted and what you would like to have sex with independent of the reasonable possibility of actually acting on it. Being gay is caused in the brain. Being pedophile is not?

    • You can't help being straight but you can help the age group you are attracted to. I have learned to spot facial features that indicate someone is underaged and I avoid them. It is not some inescapable thing like being gay where If you deny being gay you will never have any meaningful sex.

    • Being a murderer is caused by the brain too but we expect people to have the rationality to control those impulses.

    • Show All

  • It's not a choice to be attracted to something, what you do about it is.

    • yeah we still treat pedos, necrophiles and zoofiles as if they could help that they feel how they feel.

Latest Questions

Husband has private account for porn and follows naked woman daily, is this normal?
If you had the power to snap your fingers and make something happen instantly what would it be?
Can men catch feelings after sex?
Do women really squirt or is that a euphemism for orgasming?
Home >  Sexual Relationships  > Why is the "born this way" argument not viable for pedophiles, necrophioles, zoophiles and so on?