***** vs. Molestation

[Quean]

This might be somewhat random (well... it is, but eh), but I have seen many a topic on *****, and everyone seems to be under the impression that ***** molest children. Or at least that ***** are the ones to most commonly molest children.

I read a study a while back (can't find it yet, still trying sweatdrop ) that interviewed a group of college students (I believe they were all male). The study came to the conclusion that around 20-25% of males in that age group admitted to being sexually attracted to children under the age of 12. None of those interviewed had ever acted upon their urges though. In the same study, a few statistics about molestation were included, most of which I can't remember. The one I do remember is this: Out of all the so-called ***** in the US, a lower percentage of them had molested a child than of men who had to sexual attraction to children.

If you think about it, though, it makes sense. To a point at least. Just because you're attracted to women, doesn't mean you're going to rape one, right?

I realize the study is biased, being all male and only college students. Speaking of which, does anyone know of this study?

So, here are my questions:

1. What is your opinion on *****? Do you think it's natural/unnatural?

2. Do you think the study/statistics are correct or not?

3. Do you know anyone that admits to being attracted to children? If so, do you think they're really that different?

[lawtonfogle]

Quean

This might be somewhat random (well... it is, but eh), but I have seen many a topic on *****, and everyone seems to be under the impression that ***** molest children. Or at least that ***** are the ones to most commonly molest children.

I read a study a while back (can't find it yet, still trying sweatdrop ) that interviewed a group of college students (I believe they were all male). The study came to the conclusion that around 20-25% of males in that age group admitted to being sexually attracted to children under the age of 12. None of those interviewed had ever acted upon their urges though. In the same study, a few statistics about molestation were included, most of which I can't remember. The one I do remember is this: Out of all the so-called ***** in the US, a lower percentage of them had molested a child than of men who had to sexual attraction to children.

If you think about it, though, it makes sense. To a point at least. Just because you're attracted to women, doesn't mean you're going to rape one, right?

I realize the study is biased, being all male and only college students. Speaking of which, does anyone know of this study?

So, here are my questions:

1. What is your opinion on *****? Do you think it's natural/unnatural?

2. Do you think the study/statistics are correct or not?

3. Do you know anyone that admits to being attracted to children? If so, do you think they're really that different?

Have you heard of Gaia's ***** Apocalypse of about a year and a half ago? I think most of those interested in discussing this were either banned or driven into hiding. At one point, you couldn't even say the word *****. So while I could sit here and let out a line of cursing that would make a sailor blush, it was 'too dangerous' for a kid to read the word *****.

As to my opinion, I am actually interested in sexology in general, but in particular, abnormal sexology. So I find ***** interesting, albeit disturbing (basically the same reaction I get with a number of the other philias). I do think it is natural, though I think we probably should make sure we agree on what 'natural' means. Under some definitions, it would be, under others, it would not be.

As to the statistics, I think that at some time, almost everyone was attracted to children... when they too were children. I still remember such a time for myself. As to how many remain attracted once they have entered the teen years, much less the adult years, I am not sure, and really, the nature of the way society stereotypes ***** is going to keep us from getting a correct answer from the standard studies. The best thing we could do is get a high number of male volunteers (at random from society), and do a blood penile (I forget the full name) test on them. I don't know of a similar test for women, but we would need one.

Anyways, I had one friend (we have drifted apart) who did not admit it, but would have ranked high on my 'need to ask him when I grow the balls to ask a question like that' list. I also know one guy who seems a bit too interested in lolicon, but that may just be because he loves the shock value when he convinces someone else to look it up (though I think the shock value of looking up 'virgin killer' on wikipedia is far greater, though it is down right dangerous to do in public).

Anyways, I have seen some studies which have shown that ***** do have more mental problems and lower IQs than teliophiles (those with a normal age sexual attraction), but there are two flaws here. First, the mental problems are probably similar to homosexuals, but to a higher intensity, because society at large hates ***** more. I think it is clear no ***** would choose to be such, and the negative hatred and inability to confide in someone without having his (or her, though there do seem to be less females, though they make up a larger portion that many would imagine) life ruined is going to cause some mental breakdowns. as to the lower IQs, they could only test the ***** who were had been busted, and a relatively small few who has not offended, but who has still sought help. All the other *****, those who either are able to refrain from acting on their desires, and the few diabolical ones which have not been caught acting on their desires yet, are likely the smarter half of the group, and thus if we were to count them in, we would see a higher average IQ.

In other words, I think *****, besides for there sexuality, are not that different, except for indirect results of their sexuality having to be constantly hidden. I have not seen any studies looking at the difference between exclusive ***** (only attracted to children) and non-exclusive (both those who are somewhat attracted to adults, and those who are mainly attracted to adults but have some small attraction to children).

It should also be noted that in some cases, if one has a stronger attraction for adults, even if they have a noticeable attraction for children, they will not be considered a *****.

[Aneesa Etienne Coleman]

I think being attracted to children is completely natural. I mean, i think it's just one fetish that is looked down upon in today's society. I also think rape is hot and it's a turn on to me, but i would never want it to actually happen to me and it is also looked down upon.

[Agent Cougar Draven]

Not all of us are gone, Lawton. Some of us chose the higher road of ceasing conversation here.

Besides, some of us are harder to get rid of than some might think.

[xXxHeavensxXx]

What does that five star word mean?

Can someone describe it or send a link?

[Jimantha Arfson]

Quean

I read a study a while back (can't find it yet, still trying sweatdrop ) that interviewed a group of college students (I believe they were all male). The study came to the conclusion that around 20-25% of males in that age group admitted to being sexually attracted to children under the age of 12. None of those interviewed had ever acted upon their urges though. In the same study, a few statistics about molestation were included, most of which I can't remember. The one I do remember is this: Out of all the so-called ***** in the US, a lower percentage of them had molested a child than of men who had to sexual attraction to children.

Here you go:

Quote:

Not only are ***** unlikely to rape children (in the same way heterosexual males are unlikely to rape women), but statistical evidence has shown that nonpedophiles are more than twice as likely to molest children than ***** are.

Don't believe me? I don't blame you. Here are the statistics.

FBI sex offender expert Kenneth Lanning stated in a 2001 interview that "About 90 percent [of child molesters] are so-called "situational child molesters" who capitalize on opportunities to molest children but don't necessarily prefer sex with children ... The 10 percent of child molesters who make up the second category are the bona fide "*****," those who genuinely favor sex with children."

Here's the link to the interview:
http://old.valleyadvocate.com/articles/*****

Lanning's figure is supported by various sources, and since the link above seems to be down, here is another source citing similar figures:
http://www.martinfrost.ws/htmlfiles/nov2006pedophile1.html#Occurrence_in_child_sex_offenders

Studies of adult arrousability has shown that ***** make up as much as 20-33% of the adult male population. 20% is the lowest number I've seen, but I haven't seen the actual study purporting this number. I have seen, and can link to the study purporting the 33% figure.

http://www.ipce.info/ipceweb/Library/97-048_article.html

For those uninterested in reading the whole article, it was done using a number of volenteers, and measuring their arrousal using a device attached to the p***s as they were shown different materials. While 85% showed some arrousal to ***** stimuli, in 33% of their test subjects, the arrousal equaled or exceeded the arrousal to adult stimuli.

Taking the conservative numbers together, the math works out as follows:

***** molesters 10% < 90% Nonpedophile molesters

***** 20% < 80% Nonpedophiles

10/20 is then the proportion of ***** molesters to ***** relative to the figure 90/80 that represents nonpedophile molesters to nonpedophiles

10/20 = .5 < 1.125 = 90/80

The proportion thus is 1 to 2.25, making a given nonpedophile more than twice as likely to molest a child as a given *****.

I can't guarantee the links, though. You should be able to find them on archive.org, though.

lawtonfogle

Have you heard of Gaia's ***** Apocalypse of about a year and a half ago? I think most of those interested in discussing this were either banned or driven into hiding.

Hehe! That brings back memories. I was apart of that fun.

xXxHeavensxXx

What does that five star word mean?

Can someone describe it or send a link?

Turn off your word filter. The definition is "one who has a sexual attraction to prepubescent children".

[Pika Tsuki]

Just because you're ***** doesn't mean that you're necessarily going to molest children. It's more likely that someone who likes to take control will, but are not actually attracted to them. However, this does not mean that a ***** wont. All ***** are different, just as everyone else in every other category is different. I have a friend who was molested by several of her mom's boyfriends when she was growing up - one of them ended up contacting her on myspace and felt that he honestly did nothing wrong, even though she told him how every wrong it was of it. Many (not saying most - a lot could be 1000 people, for example) ***** view it as "child love", and think that there is nothing wrong with love.

@ Jimantha Arfson
Was that from the ***** Discussion/Age of Consent discussion that used to be in the ED?
There was always one problem I had with the "in the same way heterosexual males are unlikely to rape women" argument, because who else but heterosexual males would rape a woman?

[Jimantha Arfson]

Pika Tsuki

@ Jimantha Arfson
Was that from the ***** Discussion/Age of Consent discussion that used to be in the ED?
There was always one problem I had with the "in the same way heterosexual males are unlikely to rape women" argument, because who else but heterosexual males would rape a woman?

It got thrown around a lot, so it wouldn't be out of the question that it appeared in there.

As for the second paragraph, that's a good point, I'll give it. But, statistically speaking, heterosexual males aren't likely to have nonconsensual sex verses consensual or no sex with a woman.

[Pika Tsuki]

Jimantha Arfson

Pika Tsuki

@ Jimantha Arfson
Was that from the ***** Discussion/Age of Consent discussion that used to be in the ED?
There was always one problem I had with the "in the same way heterosexual males are unlikely to rape women" argument, because who else but heterosexual males would rape a woman?

It got thrown around a lot, so it wouldn't be out of the question that it appeared in there.

As for the second paragraph, that's a good point, I'll give it. But, statistically speaking, heterosexual males aren't likely to have nonconsensual sex verses consensual or no sex with a woman.

Very true, I'm just happy that you saw my point.

[Agent Cougar Draven]

Jimantha Arfson

It got thrown around a lot, so it wouldn't be out of the question that it appeared in there.

Oh, it was there. Got cited damn near every other page in every single thread iteration.

[Cirrus Storm]

Hmmm.....

1. Well, now that I'm thinking about it...I guess whatever you're attracted to, you're attracted to it...as long as it's human, cuz you can't make a baby with a roach...
2. The study seems valid enough...but I'm not too knowledgeable on statistics...
3. No, but if I knew a ***** I would get used to them.

[Irahatam]

The majority of people with ***** urges eventually find themselves in prisons because what they thought they could control, got out of hand. Unless you've had direct dealings with ***** and child molesters, trusting either one is foolishness.

[Quean]

Irahatam

The majority of people with ***** urges eventually find themselves in prisons because what they thought they could control, got out of hand. Unless you've had direct dealings with ***** and child molesters, trusting either one is foolishness.

I'd have to disagree. On of my friends admits to be a *****, but I know that he would never do anything to harm a child. The majority of ***** do NOT end up in prison, that would overflow the prison system entirely, there are much too many.