scifisam
deleted
Fantasising about such stuff is not morally wrong from my own moral perspective, although I would steer clear from someone I knew fantasised about sex with toddlers. I wish it were easier for people to admit they feel this way, and seek help.
Fantasising about teenagers is slightly different, in my own personal morality, and it even has a different name, pederasty. With teenagers you can justify it by saying that some kids that age do consent to sex in a fully informed way, but with pre-teens, you can't. If an adult - over 21, say, though that's not a strict figure - fantasises about having sex with teenagers just because they're teenagers, then I'd find it odd, and slightly disgusting, but not morally wrong. If they acted on their desires, then I'd think that was morally wrong. But I'd still think it was different to paedophilia proper.
I do think that people who fantasise about such things should get help; one reason is that they might act upon it one day, and the other is that there must be reasons that their sexual feelings lean this way - so I guess the main form of 'help' would be to seek out the root cause of their feelings. Also to give support for ways to avoid ever acting out on those feelings.
Cartoon paedo porn is very different to real paedo porn in that it doesn't use real children. I think we've had long discussions on here before about whether it would be cathartic or whether it would normalise such desires, but the essential difference is the lack of real children - except in some theoretical cartoon porn where it would be hard to say if it was a real kid CGId; I don't know if such stuff exists, and am not going to search for it.
The age of consent is arbitrary of course. Some countries (Holland, for example) have a different system where there's still an age of consent, but it varies slightly according to the ages of both participants. So a 15-year-old and a 16-year-old having sex wouldn't be illegal there. The ages are still arbitrary, but that's unavoidable.
In this country, I don't think most people would consider that 16-year-old a paedophile. I would personally be against the law taking action against him/her.
It's not only informed consent that's the issue, though that's the key one, it's that a paedophile who claims to 'love' children and want a real relationship with them, is missing one key fact: the child will grow up. So it's 'love' that has a defined end point, defined by the paedophile, not by external circumstances.
Fantasising about teenagers is slightly different, in my own personal morality, and it even has a different name, pederasty. With teenagers you can justify it by saying that some kids that age do consent to sex in a fully informed way, but with pre-teens, you can't. If an adult - over 21, say, though that's not a strict figure - fantasises about having sex with teenagers just because they're teenagers, then I'd find it odd, and slightly disgusting, but not morally wrong. If they acted on their desires, then I'd think that was morally wrong. But I'd still think it was different to paedophilia proper.
I do think that people who fantasise about such things should get help; one reason is that they might act upon it one day, and the other is that there must be reasons that their sexual feelings lean this way - so I guess the main form of 'help' would be to seek out the root cause of their feelings. Also to give support for ways to avoid ever acting out on those feelings.
Cartoon paedo porn is very different to real paedo porn in that it doesn't use real children. I think we've had long discussions on here before about whether it would be cathartic or whether it would normalise such desires, but the essential difference is the lack of real children - except in some theoretical cartoon porn where it would be hard to say if it was a real kid CGId; I don't know if such stuff exists, and am not going to search for it.
The age of consent is arbitrary of course. Some countries (Holland, for example) have a different system where there's still an age of consent, but it varies slightly according to the ages of both participants. So a 15-year-old and a 16-year-old having sex wouldn't be illegal there. The ages are still arbitrary, but that's unavoidable.
In this country, I don't think most people would consider that 16-year-old a paedophile. I would personally be against the law taking action against him/her.
It's not only informed consent that's the issue, though that's the key one, it's that a paedophile who claims to 'love' children and want a real relationship with them, is missing one key fact: the child will grow up. So it's 'love' that has a defined end point, defined by the paedophile, not by external circumstances.
