Is ***** an orientation or a fetish?

[The loving face]

Goldgato

The loving face

Errr well to ME ***** seems like a mental disorder, considering how in extreme cases ***** report not being entirely in control and all, so I would say ***** is a mental disorder based fetish.

It is harmful to both parties, and it can lead to a person to be out of control. I wouldn't say it is an orientation or even a preference. It is a compulsion.

Isn't that true of any sexual orientation? There are heterosexuals and homosexuals, for example, who molest and rape. What sets ***** apart from them as a mental disorder or a fetish?

This quote quite succintly says my viewpoint

Quote:

Well an orientation is specific to gender, so yeah… seeing as ***** is not an orientation, as an orientation refers to the gender that you are attracted to, there is clearly a difference.
***** is a paraphilia - which is classed as an unusual attraction or arousal. It is actually not always a disorder. You may not be suffering from a pathological form of a paraphilia. The average person can have up to 6 different paraphilia, and this is actually typical. However, they’re not always present to a clinical degree. It’s only a disorder when it causes some sort of impairment in functioning or distress. So - obviously if you act on it, if you’re pre-occupied with it, if it affects your ability to form healthy relationships, if it affects your ability to carry on with your day to day activities, if it causes the sufferer feelings of guilt, depression or even makes them want to harm themselves - it is a disorder.

[Goldgato]

The loving face

Goldgato

The loving face

Errr well to ME ***** seems like a mental disorder, considering how in extreme cases ***** report not being entirely in control and all, so I would say ***** is a mental disorder based fetish.

It is harmful to both parties, and it can lead to a person to be out of control. I wouldn't say it is an orientation or even a preference. It is a compulsion.

Isn't that true of any sexual orientation? There are heterosexuals and homosexuals, for example, who molest and rape. What sets ***** apart from them as a mental disorder or a fetish?

I would class as a mental disorder as something that is in potential and/or actuality harmful in one or more ways to oneself and/or others (in a very simple way to define it of course.) which separates ******.

In general a preference for a gender, does not lead to harm. When it could or does, there are other processes, and could be said they suffer from hyper sexuality, are sociopathic, etc.

Kinda how preference for some foods is different to preference for non food stuffs, compulsion for excess or too little, or like I dunno, human flesh. As a crude analogy.

By that logic heterosexuality is a mental disorder. A heterosexual who cannot control himself/herself and does not care about other people can commit molestation or rape against their preferred gender, in the same way a ***** who cannot control himself/herself and does not care about other people can commit molestation or rape against a child. There is no difference here. In both cases it's not the orientation that causes the harm, it's the lack of regard for other people. That is the mental disorder and it is independent of sexual orientation.

[The loving face]

Goldgato

The loving face

Goldgato

The loving face

Errr well to ME ***** seems like a mental disorder, considering how in extreme cases ***** report not being entirely in control and all, so I would say ***** is a mental disorder based fetish.

It is harmful to both parties, and it can lead to a person to be out of control. I wouldn't say it is an orientation or even a preference. It is a compulsion.

Isn't that true of any sexual orientation? There are heterosexuals and homosexuals, for example, who molest and rape. What sets ***** apart from them as a mental disorder or a fetish?

I would class as a mental disorder as something that is in potential and/or actuality harmful in one or more ways to oneself and/or others (in a very simple way to define it of course.) which separates ******.

In general a preference for a gender, does not lead to harm. When it could or does, there are other processes, and could be said they suffer from hyper sexuality, are sociopathic, etc.

Kinda how preference for some foods is different to preference for non food stuffs, compulsion for excess or too little, or like I dunno, human flesh. As a crude analogy.

By that logic heterosexuality is a mental disorder. A heterosexual who cannot control himself/herself and does not care about other people can commit molestation or rape against their preferred gender, in the same way a ***** who cannot control himself/herself and does not care about other people can commit molestation or rape against a child. There is no difference here. In both cases it's not the orientation that causes the harm, it's the lack of regard for other people. That is the mental disorder and it is independent of sexual orientation.

Look at my second answer.

Anyway, if you want to go in to really loose definitions, yeah it would be same as orientation due to probably some sort of biological cause to it. In essence though, and in most psychological, sexual health and law definitions, it is not.

Furthermore, what of heterosexual ******, homosexual ******, bisexual ******? Orientation of orientation?

[Goldgato]

The loving face

Goldgato

The loving face

Goldgato

The loving face

Errr well to ME ***** seems like a mental disorder, considering how in extreme cases ***** report not being entirely in control and all, so I would say ***** is a mental disorder based fetish.

It is harmful to both parties, and it can lead to a person to be out of control. I wouldn't say it is an orientation or even a preference. It is a compulsion.

Isn't that true of any sexual orientation? There are heterosexuals and homosexuals, for example, who molest and rape. What sets ***** apart from them as a mental disorder or a fetish?

I would class as a mental disorder as something that is in potential and/or actuality harmful in one or more ways to oneself and/or others (in a very simple way to define it of course.) which separates ******.

In general a preference for a gender, does not lead to harm. When it could or does, there are other processes, and could be said they suffer from hyper sexuality, are sociopathic, etc.

Kinda how preference for some foods is different to preference for non food stuffs, compulsion for excess or too little, or like I dunno, human flesh. As a crude analogy.

By that logic heterosexuality is a mental disorder. A heterosexual who cannot control himself/herself and does not care about other people can commit molestation or rape against their preferred gender, in the same way a ***** who cannot control himself/herself and does not care about other people can commit molestation or rape against a child. There is no difference here. In both cases it's not the orientation that causes the harm, it's the lack of regard for other people. That is the mental disorder and it is independent of sexual orientation.

Look at my second answer.

Anyway, if you want to go in to really loose definitions, yeah it would be same as orientation due to probably some sort of biological cause to it. In essence though, and in most psychological, sexual health and law definitions, it is not.

Furthermore, what of heterosexual ******, homosexual ******, bisexual ******? Orientation of orientation?

Why can't they all be distinct orientations, unique from one another?

[The loving face]

Goldgato

The loving face

Goldgato

The loving face

Goldgato

The loving face

Errr well to ME ***** seems like a mental disorder, considering how in extreme cases ***** report not being entirely in control and all, so I would say ***** is a mental disorder based fetish.

It is harmful to both parties, and it can lead to a person to be out of control. I wouldn't say it is an orientation or even a preference. It is a compulsion.

Isn't that true of any sexual orientation? There are heterosexuals and homosexuals, for example, who molest and rape. What sets ***** apart from them as a mental disorder or a fetish?

I would class as a mental disorder as something that is in potential and/or actuality harmful in one or more ways to oneself and/or others (in a very simple way to define it of course.) which separates ******.

In general a preference for a gender, does not lead to harm. When it could or does, there are other processes, and could be said they suffer from hyper sexuality, are sociopathic, etc.

Kinda how preference for some foods is different to preference for non food stuffs, compulsion for excess or too little, or like I dunno, human flesh. As a crude analogy.

By that logic heterosexuality is a mental disorder. A heterosexual who cannot control himself/herself and does not care about other people can commit molestation or rape against their preferred gender, in the same way a ***** who cannot control himself/herself and does not care about other people can commit molestation or rape against a child. There is no difference here. In both cases it's not the orientation that causes the harm, it's the lack of regard for other people. That is the mental disorder and it is independent of sexual orientation.

Look at my second answer.

Anyway, if you want to go in to really loose definitions, yeah it would be same as orientation due to probably some sort of biological cause to it. In essence though, and in most psychological, sexual health and law definitions, it is not.

Furthermore, what of heterosexual ******, homosexual ******, bisexual ******? Orientation of orientation?

Why can't they all be distinct orientations, unique from one another?

Because some are paraphilias, some of which are clinically harmful in some way. Others can exist without being harmful at all. Those that can be harmful (including say to ****** themselves) need to be addressed differently to other sexual desires. Refer to food reference.

I don't see a way in which ****** is not threatening. Please explain how you do?

[Goldgato]

The loving face

Goldgato

The loving face

Goldgato

The loving face

I would class as a mental disorder as something that is in potential and/or actuality harmful in one or more ways to oneself and/or others (in a very simple way to define it of course.) which separates ******.

In general a preference for a gender, does not lead to harm. When it could or does, there are other processes, and could be said they suffer from hyper sexuality, are sociopathic, etc.

Kinda how preference for some foods is different to preference for non food stuffs, compulsion for excess or too little, or like I dunno, human flesh. As a crude analogy.

By that logic heterosexuality is a mental disorder. A heterosexual who cannot control himself/herself and does not care about other people can commit molestation or rape against their preferred gender, in the same way a ***** who cannot control himself/herself and does not care about other people can commit molestation or rape against a child. There is no difference here. In both cases it's not the orientation that causes the harm, it's the lack of regard for other people. That is the mental disorder and it is independent of sexual orientation.

Look at my second answer.

Anyway, if you want to go in to really loose definitions, yeah it would be same as orientation due to probably some sort of biological cause to it. In essence though, and in most psychological, sexual health and law definitions, it is not.

Furthermore, what of heterosexual ******, homosexual ******, bisexual ******? Orientation of orientation?

Why can't they all be distinct orientations, unique from one another?

Because some are paraphilias, some of which are clinically harmful in some way. Others can exist without being harmful at all. Those that can be harmful (including say to ****** themselves) need to be addressed differently to other sexual desires. Refer to food reference.

I don't see a way in which ****** is not threatening. Please explain how you do?

***** is not threatening because it does not lead to anyone being harmed. A ***** (or a homosexual, or a heterosexual, etc) who cannot control himself/herself and lacks regard for other people is what causes harm to others. A ***** who can control himself/herself (which is most *****) are no more harmful than a heterosexual or a homosexual, or any other orientation.

[The loving face]

Goldgato

The loving face

Goldgato

The loving face

Goldgato

The loving face

I would class as a mental disorder as something that is in potential and/or actuality harmful in one or more ways to oneself and/or others (in a very simple way to define it of course.) which separates ******.

In general a preference for a gender, does not lead to harm. When it could or does, there are other processes, and could be said they suffer from hyper sexuality, are sociopathic, etc.

Kinda how preference for some foods is different to preference for non food stuffs, compulsion for excess or too little, or like I dunno, human flesh. As a crude analogy.

By that logic heterosexuality is a mental disorder. A heterosexual who cannot control himself/herself and does not care about other people can commit molestation or rape against their preferred gender, in the same way a ***** who cannot control himself/herself and does not care about other people can commit molestation or rape against a child. There is no difference here. In both cases it's not the orientation that causes the harm, it's the lack of regard for other people. That is the mental disorder and it is independent of sexual orientation.

Look at my second answer.

Anyway, if you want to go in to really loose definitions, yeah it would be same as orientation due to probably some sort of biological cause to it. In essence though, and in most psychological, sexual health and law definitions, it is not.

Furthermore, what of heterosexual ******, homosexual ******, bisexual ******? Orientation of orientation?

Why can't they all be distinct orientations, unique from one another?

Because some are paraphilias, some of which are clinically harmful in some way. Others can exist without being harmful at all. Those that can be harmful (including say to ****** themselves) need to be addressed differently to other sexual desires. Refer to food reference.

I don't see a way in which ****** is not threatening. Please explain how you do?

***** is not threatening because it does not lead to anyone being harmed. A ***** (or a homosexual, or a heterosexual, etc) who cannot control himself/herself and lacks regard for other people is what causes harm to others. A ***** who can control himself/herself (which is most *****) are no more harmful than a heterosexual or a homosexual, or any other orientation.

What about getting in the way of them themselves forming meaningful relationships, and internal problems like depression, guilt etc etc? And if they don't act on their desire, and don't feel there is something off with it, well then they sure have other problems with understanding how social rules and understanding and so forth.

So you think it is ok to be sexually attracted to an ACTUAL child? Someone that could not give consent?

[Goldgato]

The loving face

Goldgato

The loving face

Goldgato

The loving face

Look at my second answer.

Anyway, if you want to go in to really loose definitions, yeah it would be same as orientation due to probably some sort of biological cause to it. In essence though, and in most psychological, sexual health and law definitions, it is not.

Furthermore, what of heterosexual ******, homosexual ******, bisexual ******? Orientation of orientation?

Why can't they all be distinct orientations, unique from one another?

Because some are paraphilias, some of which are clinically harmful in some way. Others can exist without being harmful at all. Those that can be harmful (including say to ****** themselves) need to be addressed differently to other sexual desires. Refer to food reference.

I don't see a way in which ****** is not threatening. Please explain how you do?

***** is not threatening because it does not lead to anyone being harmed. A ***** (or a homosexual, or a heterosexual, etc) who cannot control himself/herself and lacks regard for other people is what causes harm to others. A ***** who can control himself/herself (which is most *****) are no more harmful than a heterosexual or a homosexual, or any other orientation.

Quote:

What about getting in the way of them themselves forming meaningful relationships, and internal problems like depression, guilt etc etc? And if they don't act on their desire, and don't feel there is something off with it, well then they sure have other problems with understanding how social rules and understanding and so forth.

These issues are issues that can be corrected with proper counseling, because it's not the ***** that causes them. Rather it's the external pressures that society places on them. We live in a society where even if we're not the one who says ***** are monster who should be killed, we find ourselves pressured into not objecting. This causes an atmosphere of oppression for ***** who retreat into their closet unwilling to talk to friends, family, or even professionals and lose themselves to depression and guilt. It's the same reason why so many homosexuals remain closeted, and many others commit suicide. It's not the orientation that leads them to these dark places, it's society that pushes them there.

Quote:

So you think it is ok to be sexually attracted to an ACTUAL child? Someone that could not give consent?

If no one is harmed why should I care either way? Be attracted to whoever or whatever as long as you do no harm.

[The loving face]

Still have not addressed the relationship issue.

Furthermore I am not saying that a ****** should necessarily be punished for having such an attraction, but it should be addressed.

Homosexuality can be acted on without harming someone.
****** can not.
They're different.

[Goldgato]

The loving face

Still have not addressed the relationship issue.

I'm not sure I understood your point about meaningful relationships. Do you believe the only meaningful relationships are those that are romantic and/or sexual in nature? I've found I can have very many meaningful but completely platonic relationships.

Quote:

Furthermore I am not saying that a ****** should necessarily be punished for having such an attraction, but it should be addressed.

That will not help anything because it is not the ***** that needs to be addressed, it is underlying issues connected to the ***** but not directly caused by it. These issues can and should be addressed independently of the *****.

Quote:

Homosexuality can be acted on without harming someone.
****** can not.
They're different.

There are ways in which a ***** can act on their ***** non-harmfully, such as loli. It can't replace sex, but it doesn't have to. It can take the sting off of celibacy, and besides that most ***** would be unable to bring themselves to harm a real child even if there was no fear of retribution from society.

[The loving face]

****** generally refers to sexual desire for pre-teens. You have a sexual desire but may not act on it. There already is a major internal conflict at the very least. Role-play ****** isn't true and complete act on such a desire so it does not cover it completely so the issue remains...

There shouldn't be retribution purely for the desire, but it is not normal in any sense. I really don't see how you view it otherwise.

[Goldgato]

The loving face

****** generally refers to sexual desire for pre-teens. You have a sexual desire but may not act on it. There already is a major internal conflict at the very least. Role-play ****** isn't true and complete act on such a desire so it does not cover it completely so the issue remains...

There shouldn't be retribution purely for the desire, but it is not normal in any sense. I really don't see how you view it otherwise.

Well how do you define "normal"?

[The loving face]

Goldgato

The loving face

****** generally refers to sexual desire for pre-teens. You have a sexual desire but may not act on it. There already is a major internal conflict at the very least. Role-play ****** isn't true and complete act on such a desire so it does not cover it completely so the issue remains...

There shouldn't be retribution purely for the desire, but it is not normal in any sense. I really don't see how you view it otherwise.

Well how do you define "normal"?

Depends on what approach you want to take. It is not statistically normal or even approaching. It is not morally, socially or lawfuly acceptable.

It is highly atypical. In general psychology and likely biologically.

And anyway, please don't cherry pick.

[Goldgato]

The loving face

Goldgato

The loving face

****** generally refers to sexual desire for pre-teens. You have a sexual desire but may not act on it. There already is a major internal conflict at the very least. Role-play ****** isn't true and complete act on such a desire so it does not cover it completely so the issue remains...

There shouldn't be retribution purely for the desire, but it is not normal in any sense. I really don't see how you view it otherwise.

Well how do you define "normal"?

Depends on what approach you want to take. It is not statistically normal or even approaching. It is not morally, socially or lawfuly acceptable.

It is highly atypical. In general psychology and likely biologically.

And anyway, please don't cherry pick.

I'm hardly cherry-picking. You said it's not normal, and I asked you what you're using as a standard. If anything I'm looking for more detailed information, rather than ignoring detailed information that's inconvenient to me.

[The loving face]

Well I gave you the general definitions for normal in psychology. Was a point coming? Or a reply to the small paragraph above the one sentence that said normal?


Either way if you want to speak in really broad and overly mechanic terms, then yes, ****** can be dubbed an orientation. At the same time however it remains HIGHLY atypical, and a disorder.