Sexual Attraction Is Irrelevant…

I had actually planned on writing this editorial three times, but each time it was pre-empted with a more important editorial. Now, I actually have time to sit and write this.

This is something I’ve been saying for a long time, but people have been too emotional about it to think logically. So, let’s start this editorial by weeding out people who lack the required brain power to emotional power ratio to understand this issue. Paedophiles are not bad people and they didn’t choose to be the way they are. They are irrationally feared and the laws that are passed in hopes to get rid of them cause your children to be molested more often rather than less often.  Offended by that oversimplification of the argument to come? Then you should learn to use your brain more and your emotions less and come back and finish reading this when you do. As for the rest of you, let’s dive into this issue head first.

Of course, paedophiles aren’t the only ones affected by this type of sexual discrimination.  Let’s begin with a more obscure example to really show what I’m talking about. Karla Faye Tucker, a woman from Texas, was convicted in 1984 for killing Jerry Dean and Deborah Thorton with a pick axe, ultimately executed in 1998.  What’s so interesting about this story? Well, in an interview in 1990, she had admitted to having orgasms during the murders.  All of a sudden, everyone hated her more.  Why?  I can understand hating her for murders, but for orgasms? The orgasms are irrelevant.   Fortunately, for her, she had already had her trial when this information came to light and, even if she hadn’t, there’s not much worse they can do other than put her to death.  But sexual pleasure as a motive for or happen-stance during a crime is liable to make the sentence worse or pin down an entire group of people.  It’s a knee jerk reaction.

So, some people go around molesting and/or exploiting children, and some countries want to outlaw sexual attraction to children as if that’s the answer? Well, there’s a worldwide majority consensus that thinks so. Fortunately, I know the majority is not always right. And, to show you, let me apply the same logic to another crime.

Some men go around raping women, ergo we should outlaw heterosexuality.

Hmm…  It sounds stupid when I apply it to your sexual orientation, doesn’t it?  There’s a reason for that. The sexual attraction isn’t the crime. It never has been, and it never will be. Just as the vast majority of heterosexuals are able to control themselves to not hurt a woman, the vast majority of paedophiles are able to control themselves to not hurt a child. And those who aren’t, of course, should be punished (not by the law, but by the child or his guardian).

And, then we can start to look at other mistakes we, as a people, are making. Yes, it’s right to ban regular child pornography whose stars are exploited children. Children should not have to be exploited to make a product. However, virtual child pornography should be allowed. Virtual child pornography is material that is designed to look like child pornography to the reader, but without hurting children. It is either made by using an artistic rendition of children, such as drawings or computer graphics, or people 18 or older that are modified to look like children (either in make-up or post production).  No children are exploited in these types of pornography and it gives the paedophiles something to jerk to. You think that, by outlawing everything that turns them on, you’re going to make them go away. This is not the case. You’re only going to make it harder for them to control themselves. If Chester the Molester had some virtual kiddy porn, maybe little Timmy wouldn’t have been found in a ditch somewhere with his rectum stretched.

Now, the vast majority of paedophiles, you don’t even know are paedophiles. They’re not going to tell you unless they really trust you. I mean, if you knew, do you realise the extent to which you could destroy their lives?  Fortunately for them, most of them are also attracted to people who are old enough to consent, so they don’t have any problems hiding that part of their lives. I mean, even you are probably attracted to teenagers. It doesn’t mean you’re a bad person. I mean,  you’re able to control your actions despite the attraction, are you not? Well, most paedophiles can do that too.

So, the next time you get all paedophobic, demanding laws get passed that make them disappear from your mind, remember that paedophiles are people too, and just as you didn’t choose your sexual orientation, they didn’t choose theirs.  They don’t need someone fighting them at every step of the way. They need someone who they know will be there for them, especially in a time of weakness when, without someone to talk to about it, the worst could happen.

Like what I said in my article about suicide, the solution isn’t forcing your views on them, but being there for them.

But if none of that works, and they molest a child anyway, then it’s time to cut that tallywhacker off. You can’t save everybody.

Write a Comment

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

Shortcuts & Links


Latest Posts