What is the Science of Pedophilia?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 17 окт 2024
- One of the biggest areas in theorizing why people commit sexual offenses is that of deviant or atypical sexual interests -- particularly pedophilia. In this video I explore what these attractions are, outline their causes, and encourage you to think about how help-seeking might be encouraged.
Link for embedded video: • Mysteries of the Mind:...
I just can’t understand why there are so many people attracted to kids. And babies? It scares me that it is so rampant. I would have thought it was a very small percentage of people. I’ll never understand it.
Unfortunately it is secretly a very common occurrence. The stigma is just so enormous that pretty much no one admits to it unless they're already in trouble
@Insomnia It is just a sickness. Yes people will not understand you but until you've acted on these feelings you can still be a good person. Intentions are more than feelings. If your intentions are to stop yourself from harming children then your mind has evil but is overall good. You sound like you have empathy. Do whatever you need to in order to stop yourself from hurting children. If you need to jack off to animated children do that. Once you've raped kids you will not be able to forgive yourself. A child's life will be over and in turn your own. Find your peace in living on the moral path, be good and never stray. Look into philosophy and practice mindfulness meditation 40 minutes a day, this will help with your anxiety and self control. Good luck.
@@ax4430consider going to therapy or getting treatment because humanity gains more knowledge everyday and I'm sure there is something out there to help you
Most research suggests that the rate of pedophilia is around 3-5%. Nepiophilia(attraction to infants) is actually very rare with a prevalence rate of 1%. Lolicon and other closely related subsets of it's genre constitutes almost half of the volume of animated pornography released in Japan every year (which is, like, all of it; they seriously love to hump cartoons in the Land of the Rising Sun). The sheer volume of these visual depictions of youths there seems to support the 3-5% figure and suggests that hebephilia (and maybe even true pedophilia) are not as rare as us enlightened folks here in the west would like to believe. It's well known that Japan has a long-standing girl lover(GL) tradition much as ancient Greece had a notable boy lover(BL) tradition, so I think their relaxed attitude with adult attraction to young prepubescents and adolescents compared to here in the West doubtlessly results in a much larger incidence of honesty and openness about the attraction. Another notable thing is Japan doesn't have the heavy Judeo-Christian cultural influence that has a lot to do with the comparatively prudish attitudes of the West, even though a good amount of these attitudes have been pushed on Japan by the U.S. and Britain at various points in the 20th century to the present, so they are less likely to keep these attractions in the closet. Could all of this mean that adult attraction to younger people might be as "normal" as adult attraction to members of the same gender despite its social unpopularity amongst conservative factions in Western society?
All recognized attraction bases (including those largely considered pathological in today's world, however incorrectly) exist in comparable amounts in all nations of the world, the per capita rate likely determined precisely by the size of the general population. Now, I don't understand why there would be more pedophiles and hebephiles in Japan than in the U.S., or in any other given nation, unless you are going by the simple fact that Japan has a far larger population in general than the U.S. This would mean that more homosexuals and asexuals would exist in Japan than in the U.S. too, of course.
Also consider how popular barely legal pornography is and how so many guys watch it without a second thought. Hence, I bet if we lived in a world where the barely legal age was 15 instead of 18 they would still watch it. And what if we lived in a world where it was 13? I'd make the same bet.
It's caused by being molested and exposed to things kids should never see or know about. It causes hypersexuality and it's a vicious cycle
You can really tell in this comment section who is open-minded and intelligent and who is self absorbed and opinionated
And who is a sick person being sexually aroused by someone’s little child ! I think you all need to be taken out of society , as a victim of a pedophile it destroyed my entire life , my father died my sister hung her self and all that so your type can get get their sexual gratification! Sick sick sick
It’s really strange to be open minded to pedophilia
@@hellooooooo-c7w not being open minded about it is the reason why barely any scientist is doing research on the topic and finding an effective way to treat it
@@mohqusbassaleh9675 being opened minded about it will make it become accepted and normalised. Children deserve protection children are off limits
@@hellooooooo-c7w being open minded does not equal having it normalized, thats not how life works, and pedophilia doesnt automatically mean that the pedophile has molested a kid or was creepy to one, there are pedophiles who genuinely hate that they are the way they are, but they have no control over their feelings because thats literaly how their brain is wired, do we need to villainize those people too? they are already regretting the way they are born hating them for no reason other than the way they are born will not help with anything, and while they cant control their feelings they CAN control their actions
This topic, specifically, and the ignorance that people display when tasked with contemplating the differences between the adjectives “offending and non-offending” makes me realize just how stupid the majority of the world’s population is.
In addition, many people are ignorant of the differences between true MAAs(pedophiles, hebephiles, and ephebophiles) and situational abusers(SAs). Some very good objective studies, many of which are quoted below, have shown that nearly 90% of real, demonstrable sexual abuse against minors are not done by true pedophiles and hebephiles, but by SAs. These studies are extremely compelling. Those who fit the latter definition are defined as adults (and sometimes teens) who abuse youths for reasons that have nothing to do with sexual desire but most often due to an array of other factors, including alcoholism, power trips over these youths whom such adults have particularly heavy authority over, marital problems, heavy stress, and other personal issues that have nothing whatsoever to do with a sexual desire for underagers. Some have a persistent sexual preference for prepubescents beginning in adolescence, while others have a preference for adults but act with prepubescents due to situational factors. Most theories focus on the former type since the latter type are really not pedophiles. However, most clinical and criminal studies find the latter type to be the majority of those who offend.
As has been noted in FBI statistics and many other sources is that the great majority of SAs do not have a sexual preference for minors, but initiate sexual acts with them for a variety of other reasons(most adults who perform sex acts with minors are not pedophiles or hebephiles and aren't attracted mainly to them), including severe emotional stress resulting from things like marital problems, the detrimental effects on behavior and judgment that can result from alcoholics who do not get any help and frequently consume alcohol, or simply from particularly severe power trips that are the natural consequence of the hierarchal nuclear family unit that is the socially dominant model of today. Such adults initiate non-consensual sexual contact with minors for much the same reason that heterosexual prisoners rape fellow inmates of the same gender, i.e., not because of a simple sexual desire alone but rather as a way of exercising power in an utterly corrupt way and establishing dominance and inflicting humiliation on an easy victim. The power that parents and other adults in certain positions in society have over children and adolescents under 18 make these individuals very easy victims in many cases, and this is something that our current heavily gerontocentric society doesn’t want to acknowledge, let alone deal with in any realistic manner.
There are a minority of SAs who do not operate in the home, of course, and this small number of individuals simply see youths as easy victims due to their small size and are malevolent opportunists. It's these people who are responsible for the tiny number of kidnappings and murders of minors that the press often make sensationalistic stories about, and use as the impetus to rationalize a new wave of heavily draconian laws that hurt far more innocent people than they protect, further increase police powers over society, further encroach upon what few positive rights youths under 18 currently have, and further perpetuating the already pervasive SA hysteria. However, it should be noted that the very tiny number of SAs who are strangers to the minors they kidnap or even murder pales enormously in comparison to the number of minors who are SAed or physically abused in many other ways, including murder, by parents every year. This forces us to ask difficult questions about the nature of youths' politically disempowered status in society and the hierarchal structure of the present day family unit and school system that are together the cause of by far the greatest amount of real demonstrable harm inflicted upon youths every year. A halting step towards identifying these things as major problems for youths was made when Judith Levine published her book _Harmful To Minors,_ but she didn't go into it in detail, possibly so as to avoid offending a major target audience of her book any more than she had to.
Hence, SAs, who are the cause of the vast majority of actual sexual interactions with minors (and neither MAAs nor typical child and teen fetishists), including most instances that are truly abusive and non-consensual in nature, tend to "get off" on power and dominance more than they do on simple sexual interaction with minors, and to them they are simply targets of convenience due to both their present disempowered status in society (including within the schools) and their current servile role within the dominant family unit.
This unsettling fact is obviously very uncomfortable for the present day status quo to accept, and since the political overseers of modern society are dedicated to preserving the currently hierarchical version of the nuclear family unit at any cost, it's fully understandable as to why it's far preferable for the media to promote the concept of "stranger danger" and to portray the home as the safest place for children and young teens to be despite all the readily available evidence to the contrary.
Again, this reality is not mentioned here as an attempt to disparage the institution of parenthood or the sanctity of the family, but simply to make it clear that the current state of affairs with young people lacking most of their civil rights and the parents having such a near-total control over every aspect of their youth's lives, as well as a near-monopoly on adult interaction with their young--save for a few "authorized" non-familial adults, such as teachers and coaches, who are currently discouraged from actually befriending the youths under their charge for obvious reasons related to the ongoing sex abuse hysteria--is the very crux of the greatest and usually the most severe cases of genuine abuse that occurs in society today. Love shared by family members is a very good thing, but the introduction of such a high degree of power into the equation predictably corrupts this love in too many cases and results in abuse, with some of the less scrupulous parents all too often taking this abuse into some truly horrific directions. This is why the solution that youth libbers(YLs) promote is not to break up the family unit or destroy the bond between parents and children, but simply to legally empower youths so that they can much more easily resist or escape being subject to any type of abuse or harm by others in their lives, whether it originates from the hands of strangers, teachers, co-workers, peers, or parents.
Another thing: the nuclear family unit, or earlier variations of it, emerged in specifically class divided societies where a man had to marry a woman and produce heirs to pass down property. Prior to that, family structures were much more communal, since in a world of very difficult productive capacity people lived in often isolated tribes of varying sizes, and everyone had to work hard to take care of an entire tribe and did not yet develop the individualistic attitude that two people alone were solely responsible for only themselves and the children they produced. The nature of communal property also meant there was no personal property to pass down, so no heirs to continue the "family name" were required.
Also, extended families were once popular in many Asian and European nations. Tradition there did not demand that a household be run by just two people, with their progeny being the responsibility of those two alone. The entire family took a hand. And in societies that practiced polygamy, family units were much bigger, with all the wives helping with each others' kids.
Consider what the nuclear family has become this past century, and even more so in the past few decades when the current wave of moral panics started. It's become far more insular, with little community involvement in a couple's (or single parent's) raising of their progeny. In the authoritarian school system, the teachers and other adult staff have full control and basically become replacement parents for the day. Youths are allowed outside to play and frolic much less than when I was a kid, so nuclear family households are more restrictive than ever, and outside the "prying" eyes of the wider community. There are plenty of youths in my neighborhood today, but you would never know it unless you happened to see them escorted to and off their school buses by a parent or older sibling during the school year, or rare occasions when families had a big backyard outing during the summer. When I was a kid, you would have seen the neighborhood filled with unsupervised youths, even during some days in the winter months, and would have no doubt that these neighborhoods had many young residents.
This has resulted in these increasingly insular and small family units, mostly cut off from the community at large, to become great potential sources of real actual offenders and abuse. The fact that most forms of actual abuse, including sexual abuse that our society is so obsessed with, is willfully overlooked by the antis, including those among our community, because their real goal is to protect the status quo, not the youths from offenders. They only want to "protect" them from sources of danger external to the family. Even if such sources are far more often imagined rather than real, and often take the form of unauthorized adults having any type of influence on their young. This has reduced the freedom of youths even more than I remember it when I was a kid, since they get virtually no time away from the adults who control them.
Then this question arises: if the nuclear family unit is to be preserved regardless of how things change in the future, what happens when (I prefer to say when, but I'll say "if" here) society loses the ability to literally force youths to stay in this particular type of family unit, under the control and boot of just the two adults who sired them (or adopted them)? What if youths have the choice to stay in said families, and will do so in large numbers only if said units undergo a democratic reformulation?
In the latter case, then you may have found a democratic way to preserve the nuclear family unit. Nevertheless, if it still doesn't survive as the main "norm" of society even after this, then that means it is ultimately incompatible with higher forms of democracy and freedom, and could only work if forced to remain intact. If such proves to be the case, then I would support a better family form, or set of family forms, to replace the nuclear unit. Maybe a new, democratic form of communal family units. There is no way to tell from our present historical vantage point. I simply opine that if the nuclear family is inherently predisposed to serve society well, then it will survive in some form into the far future by adapting itself to changes. If not, then perhaps it is best that it go the way of the dinosaur.
That is how I see it as a civil libertarian progressive.
@@A_Time_of_UniversaI_Deceit man, i usually dont comment on people writing essays because dont read it if you dont like it right?
But what the actual heck man, i thought my phone was looping instead of actually scrolling down
@@winterwraith8339 They either type extremely fast or have a lot of time on their hands.
I know people are going to turn their noses up at this, but the uniform public hysteria over pedophilia, child pornography and total lack of reason in the public mindset on the subject is probably a product of social engineering perpetrated by the people that would use it as a tool to control public discourse.
If you think about the level of hysterical behavior that comes out of just about anyone as soon as this topic is raised, you see that it's disproportionate when compared to other social issues or crimes.
When a person is charged with mass murder they are innocent until proven guilty.
When a person is SUSPECTED (not even charged) of having some digital pictures stored on their computer (regardless of the outcome of the investigation) they are dragged out into the street and beaten to death by their neighbors (otherwise normal people). This is not coincidence.
I'm probably taking some kind of risk just by pointing this out. Fuck it.
I honestly feel like part of why it evokes such an intense reaction is due to the results of those actions, though. Like, children are one of if not the most vulnerable human beings there are, their brains aren't even finished developing yet, and they're fully dependent on adults- to take advantage of that for nothing more than sexual gratification is genuinely disturbed, not to mention the fact that it results in lifelong trauma, afaik, across the board, essentially altering who they'll get to be when they're adults before they even get the chance to get there and never for the better. Murder is a horrible crime but a murder victim's suffering is over, a csa victim's suffering will in most cases survive longer than the one who did it to them in the first place
We should have strict laws against child pornography
@@Jason-si8iu I'm pretty sure we do but I'm also pretty sure they need to be stricter
We should let all the drug offenders out, and fill them back up with pedophiles
@@finn_in_the_bin5263 the severity of the punishment depends on a lot of factors like the state u live in, whether prosecution deems it as a state or federal crime, and obviously the details of the crime. When internet is involved, you can have access to people across state lines and even internationally, so it's very easy to move cases like this to a federal level based on that. On a federal level, there's a MANDATORY minimum sentence of 5 years for receipt of child pornography. Even the judge cannot overrule this. The government is likely to recommend a much harsher punishment though. Usually 10-15 years of incarceration. Followed by 5 or 10 years of supervised release. Paying restitution to the victims. Sex offender registration for life. No internet access, no contact with minors, no pornography of any kind, no cell phone with internet, no computer with internet....the list goes on and on. I think people underestimate the severity of the legal punishment of being convicted with this crime.
Friendly reminder to those with OCD that this video might not be a good idea to watch! Reassurance seeking is a compulsion, too. Take care of yourself and your mental health!
Yea this fear might be the hardest of all for people with OCD
Normalizing pedophilia doesn't mean suddenly decriminalising child abuse and molestation, along with it's related CSAM, same as straight people cannot sexually assault the target of their desires, even though they can legally conscent. It means allowing pedophiles to accept their urges and allow them to talk about it more and get help socializing to have something to lose if they act. It also allows them to learn about all the harm and torture victims are forced to go through when they're abused. Most pedophiles can empathize with victims. It's only a minority who's anti-social.
It shouldn't be normalised but those with OCD need to seek help & those who do have them thoughts should speak out & not be scared to speak out if they're seeking help before they do stoop low.
No it should stay like now. All this normalizing makes people go even more nuts.
I do feel bad for them! In a way It must be horrible to live with this.
It is
The only thing it is an evil satanic Temptation you need to get rid of it and pray to God and have him to show you how to control these Temptations
@@shannonpattenthetexasbb totally agree with you. The Lord our God can fix Anything. He’s a verse that allows me to understand this concept and stay strong.
◄ Ephesians 6:12 ►
For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms. (NIV)
@@RandomDude-nk8zf Jesus has the power to heal and he still does all you got to do is pray that him everyday
@@shannonpattenthetexasbb Amen brother, we live in evil very spiritual times right now. What we need is people to start walking up and finding Jesus!
Thank you for this video, it was very educational, i was shocked by the fact that their brain has a significant difference and changes their perspective of what’s attractive, also liked how it gives another perspective and helps to understand that they need help, prevention of whatever these people might want to do is important and should be a priority to improve our society
Life sentences are a great prevention
I agree, they were born like that. The people with this should go seek help if they don't want to harm children
@fln764 Hehe, that's funny man. Hope Satan thinks its funny too while he tortures you in the next life
@fln764 Satan will use you and not give a fuck about you😂 You are only a commodity to him, like a condom they'll use once and throw away. Have fun in internal hell while the rest of us watch you from Heaven.
And who is a sick person being sexually aroused by someone’s little child ! I think you all need to be taken out of society , as a victim of a pedophile it destroyed my entire life , my father died my sister hung her self and all that so your type can get get their sexual gratification! Sick sick sick
Understanding why they are "the way they are" does not equate to accepting them. If science can find a way to stop these people from acting upon their urges, both in person and via visual CP, then all good to them.
If not, then these people need to be kept away from children.
As a mother, as a victim of coercion as a 13 and 14 year old by adult men in their late 30s and 40s, and after learning what happened to my friend's 4- and 6-year old daughter's at the hands of their 17-year old cousin, I will never accept, care about, or feel any empathy for these people.
Infants, toddlers, and young children are literally physically damaged for life, and some die from their injuries because of adults who act on their selfish urges. It's abhorrent and enraging to think about.
I think you are 100% correct! Further than that I believe this is the major flaw of political correctness or what you call wokeness today. There can only be one correctness which is derived from science. Any conclusions or actions not based on science have a high chance of being wrong, ultimately damaging our society. I think we need to get away from blindly accepting conclusions from ideologies that sound nice at the first glance and rather find the root cause of problems and inequalities even if certain theses or conclusions will offend a lot of people.
In a simplified example: You don´t want to tell a person with anorexia nervosa to keep loosing weight to not offend or hurt them in the short term.
Or you should not tell a smoker that its a good idea to just try reducing their smoking gradually when science says stopping completely is the most effective way.
I know some people can't help what they are or their attractions. But we need to find a balanced solution to this problem. The kids need to be kept safe and sound
Currently our gerontocentric society is heavily designed to protect youths from genuine MAAs who as you said are unable to change their attractions, but ignores the reality of the existence of situational offenders(SOs) who usually do not have a strong or preferential attraction to youths(not real pedophiles or hebephiles in the vast majority of cases and can control their attractions) who make up the bulk of those who abuse youths. It also is based on the myth of "stranger danger" despite the fact that SOs who are strangers to youths, including the very rare breed of serial killer that targets them, are extremely rare. It further ignores that most SOs who commit acts of genuine and demonstrable abuse against them operate _within the home_ and sometimes within other institutions where adults have the most direct and strictest degree of power over them, such as boarding schools. Believing that SOs hide behind every street corner, or reside in at least one house on any given neighborhood block produces much hysteria that justifies a huge array of draconian laws, and is the foundation of a moral panic.
Thus, instead of enforcing these protectionist measures I believe we should focus more on educating our youths about sexuality and empowering them. I believe legally empowered and well educated youths are fully capable of identifying and avoiding--as well as even effectively opposing--such individuals in their midst. Further, I believe that the MAA community--including the many caring MAAs that exist within it based on my discussions and interviews with them--are likewise fully capable of identifying such individuals and aiding in their opposition. I don't think the many good people in the MAA community would be tolerant of those who are genuinely predatory against youths in their midst. They would likely be among the best protectors of younger people in a better world, rather than presumed to be their greatest potential source of harm.
The way laws and restrictions are designed to willfully use legal force against genuine MAAs to make certain that guilty ones get indicted, and taking away the freedom of these groups for alleged "protection," is the antitheses of democratic freedom and civil liberties. Such pre-emptive legal actions and assumptions are nothing but destructive to the foundation of a free society. Moreover, they are simply excuses to control others and maintain a specific status quo, not "protecting" anyone from any demonstrable harm. It makes as much logical sense as assuming all other nations are our enemies based on the claim that we can't tell which ones are harboring sinister intentions towards us and which ones aren't, thus promoting war against all of them "just in case." Such draconian legislation and rationales on moralizing grounds within what is supposed to be a liberal and democratic framework are like a few cancer cells or viral pathogens appearing in an otherwise healthy system. They soon begin to spread and engulf more and more of the healthy organ systems until nothing is left but cancerous masses or infected cells that ultimately lead to the death of the organism if not fully neutralized before they spread too far. Such legislation enacted even under the best of intentions never leads to the greater good... unless one considers rampant witch hunts, large numbers of decent people driven to ruin and suicide simply for having the "wrong" thoughts, the spreading of hysterical conspiracy theories that lead to many forms of freedom crushing legislation, the rapid politicization of scientific research, and the cruel marginalization of minority groups to the point of officially becoming non-citizens who are not protected by constitutional rights (and thus endangering the rights of everyone else) to be conducive to the greater good or a true liberal and democratic society.
One thing about society's current protectionist stance on this issue in a general sense is the degree of misanthropy it rides on. Any laws based on a powerful, emotionally-driven mistrust of your fellow human beings invariably leads to the "guilty unless absolutely proven innocent" mentality that pervades any type of "special circumstance" law. The "better to be safe than sorry" attitude may work at times in terms of various personal choices one may make, but they are a terrible concept to integrate into the legal system for any society that purports to be based on individual liberty and freedom... and to remain such a society.
This protectionist attitude is a form of fundamentalist view that is based on these types of unhealthy emotions that serve as rationalizations for venting against their fellow human beings. This is why those most concerned about promoting the anti attitude do not tend to be emotionally healthy individuals. They have a lot of hatred and fear to deal with, and they not only need a convenient target to direct it against; but they need another group to serve as the cultural equivalent of "damsel in distress" whom they attempt to control in order to "protect" them the perceived "bad guy."
And since misanthropy is an emotionally unhealthy attitude, this is why we do not end up with a sane or free society when it's worked into legislation. It's all based on emotion. This is why it's so appealing to those who have a lot of inner anger, fears, and doubts, and need a convenient target to direct it at. Moreover, they need another target that acts as a proxy for them to "protect" and "preserve" so as to rationalize this behavior; the institutions of the status quo, particularly the Paradigm of Childhood Innocence, provides such a proxy for them. If all opportunities are seen misanthropically, every choice is an opportunity for harm. And we could keep whittling away at all manner of choices people seem capable of harming themselves through until we're reduced to nearly none.
The youth liberation platform(YL), which is growing and gaining momentum gradually but steadily thanks to the growth of socially-driven media, is a thorn in the side and a major "elephant in the room" for protectionists that is going to get bigger and take up more discomfiting space in the metaphorical "room" as time passes. It's currently not quite so big that it can't be largely ignored or dismissed by protectionists (who love saying nonsense things like, "the number of youths who want their civil rights are incredibly rare, and the number of adults who agree are at least as rare"), but when that changes - especially now that lowering the voting age is gaining momentum in many areas around the world, including various jurisdictions in the U.S. - that big fat elephant will have to be accounted for.
Moreover, concern for whether security should trump civil liberties is another major "elephant in the room" that permeates the divide between empowerment and protectionist ideologies. This is because the threats to civil liberties that the protectionist stance provides is beginning to be taken more seriously by progressives and Libertarians who truly do respect and revere these principles. That is what prompted the super-courageous journalist and honorable lawyer Debbie Nathan, among others, to openly challenge such things during the heyday of the hysteria, and to identify the sex abuse industry that thrives when the protectionist mindset is dominant as a major component of the problem. In other words, as the protectionist mentality begins to overreach, more progressives find it increasingly difficult to maintain the fear that keeps them quiet and/or complicit and begin speaking out on the matter. Eventually, a majority comes to realize that freedom over security is the best choice to go with for all concerned, and its cons are much easier to live with than the cons which a security state creates.
You can help who you are. Evil should never be expected.
What??
Why, RUclips, what’d I ever do to you?
Ironically, now I’m curious, I didn’t know this is a real thing people actually study.
I like the scientific explanation for this phenomenon. You were scholarly, research oriented and presumably peer reviewed. You should submit these findings to a pediatric journal for publication.
Why do people put more financial effort into testing LGBT men's attraction in conversion therapy camp, than put more effort into testing a person's attraction to children ?
Easy:
They don't care about fixing REAL issues like p**ophilia!
Because as long as the man is attracted to someone of a similiar age and doesn't harm them in anyway, there is no real danger. Two consenting adults in a relationship, straight or gay, is not harming anyone
One is harmful and wrong one isn’t. It’s not the same
_The Rind Report_ showed that harm from adult-minor sex is not near as universal and not typically as severe as often touted, but it did exist and occurs usually when contact is fully non-consensual, which is a no-brainer I would think. But not in anywhere near sufficient enough to justify the current degree of moral panic, restrictive measures over MAA attraction(pedophilia, hebephilia, ephebophilia), or mass infringement of rights of both MAAs and youths on a "just in case" basis.
Based on my discussions with antis/NONs over the years on this topic, it seems that this overcompensating concern also extends into an anti's near-total lack of concern for many readily demonstrable threats to younger people's lives and emotional well-being that do not involve sexuality. For instance, this is why you almost never see people even acknowledging youth liberationists'(YLs) concerns for our society's reliance on the personal automobile -- responsible for by far the highest number of fatalities and serious injuries inflicted upon youths every year; parental neglect & abuse -- antis rarely want to even discuss the harm that many youths per year receive as a result of being confined to the insular nuclear family; the emotional and even physical abuse that so many youths endure every year by being compelled to attend the authoritarian schooling system with its rigidly hierarchical and heavily standardized regimen of "learning" that is actually based on the methodology of the Prussian military developed in the early 19th century; or the forced denial of access to information at the discretion of parents and politicians that could potentially enable youths to learn about the world around them and thus make more informed choices. This is why their claim that their primary goal is the well-being of youths overall does not stand up to serious objective scrutiny. Anything that may cause them a lot of demonstrable harm on either a physical or emotional level (or both) that is not heavily disapproved of by society, which is arguably necessary for the status quo as-is to function properly, and does not involve sexuality of any sort is almost always given everything from only nominal displays of concern to a complete free pass.
@@A_TimeofUniversalDeceit Please tell me you did not for real just write a paragraph on why pedophilia should be legal
I can only tell my story of thoughts that "attacked" me. I was once let down by my closest friends called as a freak and a bad person. It really hitted me deaply. And then, one month later, I had my very first strong and heavy panic attack with the loss of orientation and a spinning head feeling. At this point, the thoughts, especially the anxiety of being a pedophile startet. I was fighting against these thoughts with any less knowledge because I didn't know what these actually were and how I got them. Until one day, where I visited a neurological doctor who told me the issue that I had was just some intrusive thoughts. It made me feel better when I realized after his conclusion that these thoughts don't mean anything about me. The time went until I asked myself if intrusive thoughts appear randomly in the mind of someone, then why did my felt like they were aimed at a specific point? So I did some research until i discovered pocd. It gave me hope where I red that people who suffer under POCD are scared of children and have no chance of becoming a pedophile. Till this day I still fight against my POCD, but I know that these thoughts don't mean anything to me an any little thing like listening to a song where the lyrics says the word child doesn't make me instantly a pedophile. Yeah, it's like that by me. And i also found out that most pedophiles have an low IQ, have images of thoughts that an normal person won't have and they don't feel empathy. But I do feel it , a lot. And Ibknow that this is a crime that goes beyond the humanal race. And I also hate crimes. But they don't care if its bad or not. The only thing they care is to "entertain" themselves.
Pocd is the worst part of ocd.
Ocd have so many subtypes. I suffer with religious ocd and ive been an atheist my entire life
I have been SA since I was a toddler, and I'm conservative, but completely open minded. I'm over protective of women, age doesn't matter. My best friend's dad molested her as a child and he was always very weird with me. I have so much more respect for those who struggle with this, but once they act on it, I can 0-100quick because quite a few of these people who indulge, are really sick with the type of shit they do. I'm sure they built up to it but they let themselves get that far. Now, I'm not perfect by any means. I use some pretty heavy shit because I have a death wish and trauma sucks. But I don't do shitty things like steal, or treat people awful, I'm not homeless, etc. I kept all my morals, I just have a much more dulled down personality. There's no excuse for whatever people indulge in, for making them a shitty person. People can control themselves, they just don't want to.
@@andylee5759 I'm not stupid to think that only because I had a shitty live that this means that I have the right to hurt the innocent. I totally respect the humanity of everyone who respects it as well and won't hurt anyone. Those who think that they can hurt anyone is just messed up in the mind
@@gl1tch133 I totally hope you don't think I implied that you would hurt anyone, I didn't mean to if that's how it came across. I know how when it comes to most things in life, people very easily give into their urges, it's everywhere all across humanity, and not even mildly, they let it run away with them. I have a lot of respect for you. Especially because this isn't an easy thing to even talk about when/if you need to.
This is arguably one of the most challenged topics that people are usually afraid to talk about. How did it go that way?
Its because its extremely traumatizing what people will do to kids. The abuse of their mental state to take from them, by coercion or by force.
And kids are far more helpless to this abuse, both physically and mentally. To make matters worse, before the law can get involved, it needs proof, and sometimes proof cant be obtained unfortunately. Imagine hearing that as a kid, a guilty adult being set free, to continue being near you. And the threats they promised if you told ringing through your head, as they close the door to your house.
Its too much
Thus why this topic is extremely sensitive, and punishments are severe
because people are dumb , or not sincere
@@winterwraith8339 Why aren't they they traumatized when it is happening between the people of their age, and that was happening in many countries around the world?
We need to find a way to help these individuals deal with their urges in a healthy way without acting on them.
I've once saw a case of a person who have experienced a sudden pedophilia desires , the guy was married and that was shocking for him as well bcs he never felt that way so he goes to a doctor and he discovered a tumor in a particular area of the brain.. do you think that away from psychological problems and traumas can pedophilia caused by a physical disease ?
Yeah I've seen that too
A crosswire in the brain causes paedophilia according to James Cantor. So a tumor developing later could cause this.
Charles Whitman was a Texas University shooter who had a tumor that made him more aggressive. He left a note asking for an autopsy asking for his brain to be looked at.
I've read read a lot of preliminary research about head traumas, and I have problems with claims that pedophilia--or any other attraction base--is the result of early tumors, traumas, some type of head injury., etc. Similar claims have been made about the possible catalyst for sociopathic tendencies and various forms of mental illness exhibited later in life, and most research sounds to me----as attempts to connect pedophilia (and likely other unpopular attractions) to sociopathy, or to pigeonhole it as a mental aberration. Interesting coincidence, hmmm? Most of these studies are likely, I would bet, conducted by many of the same researchers who tried (unsuccessfully) to get hebephilia into the DSM, and argue to continue keeping pedophilia in there indefinitely. I would love to personally fund further objective research in this area to see how well these claims stand up to strong scientific scrutiny and methodology, and I wish my bank account was capable of this.
I understand this guy's point. You have to understand that the age of consent was 13 in the 1800s but was only put up to 16 because of prostitution. It had nothing to do with pedophila (or rather) it wasn't because 13 year olds was prostitutes but 10 and 9 year olds which in them days was prepubescence and the odd ones that wasn't got pregnant. They knew that if there left it at 13, 10 year olds would still get pregnant and if there put it up to 16, it would stop but it would most likely be the 13 year olds being pregnant. They knew that no matter what the age of consent it would always encourage a few ages younger to be admired and exploited. This is why people have talked about raising the age to 21 because then it would be 18 the youngest who could be seen as prostitution which actually is legal providing you not being taken advantage of. The problem here though is 18 is still a teen and therefore is a grey area if it's really an adult. Also studies see 25-27 is the age where the mind is Psychologically developed and you feel mature. The problems there is 22-24 would be the lowest exploitative would possibly happen which still falls under 25-27 unless we put the age of consent to 30 even 35 meaning 33 the lowest age of prostitution. Problem is who is gonna wait till 30-35 to get laid?
What is your argument even? Let people fuck kids because otherwise we should raise the age of consent to 35?
How can you people write so much and do it all in one paragraph?
It doesn't work. Men do sexual selection just as much as women, but different. Men sexually select for women/virgins that are willing or easy to bully into getting pregnant in horrible conditions. A.k.a. compliant, agreeable, don't say no, don't ask for anything, don't ask questions, youth, neonateous face, etc. (they don't care if she is going to be a good mother, they IGNORE ALL RED FLAGS).
Interesting points🤔🤔👌and yeah, I’m pretty sure that studies say that our brains are fully grown by the time we turn 25. With that in mind, I also agree that the age of consent or with anything that requires a minimum age should be moved to at least 21 years old. After all, 18 and 19 are still “teens” (literally in the word) even if society says otherwise.
Which location are you referring to when you say the age of consent was 13 in the 1800s?
Just because you have a attraction to someone don't make it right to act on it.
In a world where life expectancy was mid 20s, 75% of births did not reach the age of reproduction, the species did not have the luxury of waiting too long.
When you have a mental illness that affects children and causes them to experience life long emotional trauma that affects every part of their life, relationships, nightmares, causing to never have a normal sexual relationship forever because you needed to satisfy your own personal urges then I can’t have empathy for that. What’s the difference between having a desire to beat and strangle children? If that was the case do you believe you should be able to just hang around kids?? No… if your mental illness hurts others then you need to find a solution that makes it so you can’t… cut it off… cut it off so you can’t hurt others.
It's not a mental illness in either the latest edition of the DSM (2013) or the latest edition of the ICD (2019).
Attraction ≠ action
if someone is studying this do they test themselves for this and make the result public?
How would you test for it?
@@tannerman46 I thought they were doing brain scans.
interesting video, but one thing is that you should not have your picture in the thumbnail for _this_ video.
I know exactly what I was capable of understanding and it was A LOT more than what society says I should have been able to understand.
I've always been interested in why someone would ever find attraction towards children and to know that there's sub-humans that act on those fantasies sickens me. However, I am glad to know that there are those people, if not most of them wanting to find solutions to fight against their urges and will never act on them either. But attractions towards minors is still a terrible thing that I still believe is obviously an action that must be punished because 50 minutes of fun for them would be 50 years of full-on trauma, depression and psychologic/mental troubles that must be treated so that child can try have a normal life, whilst also having the same opportunities that everyone else would have; that was overall due to one event which goes onto wasting valuable resources that could be used in other areas. all because some random child fiddler couldn't resist themselves.
But once again I am very glad to hear that there are people in those groups wanting to make those changes because they are aware of their actions which to me individually humanizes those who want to make a change, which is something we should encourage people to do and not just label them as a pedo and move on as that would only encourage more people with those urges to act on them.
Depends on how you define children. Anyone above puberty
was defined as an adult before the industrial revolution. Age of marriage was 7 in the US. A beautiful child can easily be quite sexually attractive. And what about the subhumans who act on homosexuality?
@@AshrafAnam To clarify when I said child I meant anyone 17 or below I should have specified I know it's not the actual definition but that was what I intended the word to mean. also people may not agree with stuff like the lgbtq but What you have stated is just straight-out homophobia and has no relevance to this conversation. Yeah I called people who do terrible things to people 17 and under subhuman as an insult but to call someone who is gay subhuman is a completely different subject and one I will not amuse.
@@AshrafAnamno it wasn't. The age of consent in the USA was 10 or 12 depending on the state. It was 7 in Delaware but that was in the late 1800s to mid 1900s.
the problem with that is that p-words find prepubescents attractive and not teenagers. The majority of child sa isn’t even as a result of the person finding their victim attractive.
Also, why exclude 18 and 19 year olds from your definition? They’re not really that much different from 17 year olds.
@@jessepinkman805you don't need to clarify. We don't live in the past so it's irrelevant. I feel like he's just making excuses.
You said the philias cause "sexual arousal ..."
But where is the line between simple aesthetic appreciation of the natural beauty of children (clothed or unclothed) and a desire to simply stroke/touch them, or to molest them sexually? It seems to me that these perimeters need far better discrimination.
Peddofilia is an exclusive attraction to prepubescent human beings, regardless of age. We may take into consideration the case of Shauna Rae, who is a real life loli. Because she hasn't gone through puberty due to a tumor, she is still biologically and physically a child, which makes it hard if not impossible for her to date older men. I understand men who would rather date 14 year old girls that look over 20 than 20 year old girls who look 14. One is legally wrong and the other is socially wrong. Yes, appearances do matter more than facts in society. I don't know how to take this, but I have accepted the worst of humanity a short time ago
See, you are reacting to your emotions.
More concisely, it is an ongoing attraction to prepubescents from ages 3-10 and in some cases up to 13 depending on the Tanner stage of the Tanner scale of human development being used. (Many 14 or 15-year-old's would not be pubescent/reached puberty, i.e., in Tanner stages 2 or 3 of development; many would instead be in stage 4, and a few might appear to be in stage 5.)
All the chronophilias, preferred age ranges, and prevalence rates:
Nepiophilia | infants 2-3 | 1% or less
Pedophilia | prepubescents 3-10 (in some cases up to 13) | 3-5%
Hebephilia | pubescents from ages 11-14 | 16-20%
Ephebophilia and Teleiophilia | post-pubescents 15-17 (sometimes up to 19) and young adults in their 20's and 30's | 75-86%
Mesophilia | middle-aged adults in their 40's and 50's | 48%
Nepiophilia - corresponds to Tanner stage 1; rarest of the chronophilias.
Hebephilia - coined by Bernard Glueck in 1955(14) but didn't become widespread in literature until it was popularized by Ray Blanchard the 1980's.[15] The age range of this chronophilia typically corresponds to Tanner stages 2 and 3.
Ephebophilia - ongoing pattern of sexual attraction toward post-pubescents youths from 15-17 (late teens) and sometimes up to 19. Some experts say this corresponds to tanner stage 4; but this is highly disputed as the age of puberty appears to be decreasing.[13]
Teleiophilia - Coined by Blanchard in 2000; usage of this term has been slowing in comparison to more recent ones.[16] One of the main adult-based chronophilias. A sexual preference for younger adults in their 20's or 30s. Most people are teliophilic. Tanner stage 5.
Mesophilia - Preference for middle-aged adults aged 40 to 50. It's prevalence(term coined by Michael Seto) in society is hinted at by the relative popularity of the slang MILF (which stands for "Mom I would Like to *"), as well as the derived acronym DILF. Results from an online survey about paraphilic sexual interests suggest that 34% of women and 48% of men have reported sexual fantasies about older partners.
-These refer to attractions to people of a certain age range, not the act of sex or romance with people in those ranges.
-Technically, chronophilic labels do not relate to age itself but to preferences for human sexual maturity stages(body type, muscle development, etc.)
-There is no evidence that preferred ages among men change as they themselves age, but for older women this may be different.
-Each of the chronophilias is based on a stage of the Tanner scale of human development which defines development based on sexual characteristics of human beings from childhood to adulthood. Physical features may not be the only measurement. Ex: some pedophilic males have reported "playfulness" as part of what they find attractive in prepubescents.
Studies using phallometry have found that most men show at least some arousal to prepubescents, with a significant minority demonstrating a clear preference. We do know that when expanding the definition of pedophilia to encompass attraction towards ages as high as 12 or 13 (i.e. "pedohebephilia"), phallometry consistently suggests that around 20% of men are equally or more aroused by "children".[4] As James Kincaid says.
A recent study of ideal desirability using a computer program called FacePrints found that "the ideal 25-year-old woman... had a 14-year-old's abundant lips and an 11-year-old's delicate jaw." that small lower face providing also the prominent eyes and cheekbones of prepubescents. We are told to look like children if we can and for as long as we can, to pine for that look.
Further, the number of preferential hebephiles and ephebophiles is likely to be at least 10 times that the number of pedophiles.[1] According to Michael Seto and the DSM-5, the actual prevalence of Pedophilia is unknown, with an estimate of up to 3-5% (American Psychiatric Association, 2013).[4][8] Evidence concerning women is for all practical purposes, absent.
Cross-cultural, historic and species literature appears to suggest this, as put forth by Rind and Yuill. Further, present-day modeling studies display a hebephilic/ephebophilic Minor-Attracted optimum for male heterosexual attraction:
"For example, Johnston and Franklin (1993) had subjects "evolve" a beautiful female face over iterated generations on a computer program designed to simulate natural selection. In the end, the most attractive versions of females' faces had proportions typical of girls aged 11-14. Braun, Gruendl, Marberger, and Scherber (2001) used morphing software to vary female characteristics and found that facial shapes of girls of about 14-years-old, with smooth, pure skin, produced the highest attraction ratings. They found that even the most attractive mature female faces could be made more attractive by morphing into them greater and greater degrees of immaturity. [...] The foregoing considerations suggest a range of female ages, which most typically are capable of producing adaptive attraction responses in mature males with respect to reproduction. This range extends from puberty, when reproductive value is maximal, into the 20s, when fertility is greatest, and beyond while fertility lasts. Within this range, male preferences may typically peak, for example, at female ages of 17 or 18, a compromise of highest reproductive value (ages 12 or 13) and fertility (ages 22 or 23) (cf. Williams, 1975). Depending on local social and cultural conditions, this peak may be shifted (i.e., recalibrated) to younger or older female ages (Buss, 1989)."[7]
Law enforcement absolutely need to know who pedophiles are. They should not be known publicly unless they’ve committed a crime: watching or distributing child pornography or raping kids. If you don’t know potential perpetrators, how are you supposed stop them effectively?
And how will law enforcement know who potential perpetrators are if they never come forward in the first place, due to fears of such over reach?
And exactly where does this stop? There are a huge array of factors that increase a persons potentiality to commit crime. Which ones should we police? If someone is poor, from a single mother household and has a mental disorder should they also be on some kind of preemptive policing list? All three of those factors are indicated as increasing the likelihood of a person committing crime.
What exactly does the "police knowing" about them entail? Intrusive surveillance despite no crime? Mandatory questioning simply bc they have a disorder? Meanwhile the actual perp is a pedo who never came forward and the police are now wasting time.
What exactly would the guidelines be?
This solves nothing. Not only can you not even accomplish this normally, trying to make people voluntarily submit to this will just make them even less likely to come forward and get the help they need.
As always, we first want to criminalise being ill before we think to treat it. This has been the case throughout most of history, even recent history. If the person has not committed a crime then there is no reason for the police to be involved unless you actually agree with intrusive surveillance, and biased and potentially inefficient questioning.
In law enforcement it doesn’t really matter what you may know about people, yes it will help to spot them, but officers can’t do their job without physical evidence which can be very difficult
I can answer this. Shouldn't all poor people be on a "theft" watch list? I mean how can you stop them from stealing if you don't know exactly who they are and what their income level is to asses the threat?
Here's the problem, we have NO idea how many are out there and how many offend.
Maybe 50% offend. Maybe it's 1%.
The other problem is that the models are all biased, which ultimately endangers children. "Stranger danger" has lead to more child abuse than ever imagined simply because it got parents to focus on strangers when it's almost always family, friends of family, or step parents (bio-parents almost never offend).
We are also using a model of it being all men, when the current stats are showing it's likely 50/50 male and female offenders.
We just don't know enough yet to be effective in preventing this. But what we ARE doing is leading to MORE offending, not less. Because our tactics are based on fear and self-righteousness....not effectiveness.
Many many pedophiles in the justice system on every level. Why do you think the FBI waited so long to execute a search warrant on Epstein's Pedo Island? Many were on the lists and then zero evidence was found!! It was cleaned out and that was their plan
This is extremely important to understand. Yes it’s distressing but it is a part of society and demonize it hasn’t really worked well for us. If more people understood it we might be able to deal with abuse of children better. Thanks for the video, it’s very informative and I learned a great deal.
Nobody chooses thier sexual attraction/orientation...nobody chooses what race they are born either..is it ok to be a racist?..no,because nobody chooses thier race..so why is it ok to hate minor attracted people?...
Is sex a legal issue..do I need to go to a lawyer before having sex so they can file the appropriate paperwork with the court?..No..because human sexuality is not a legal issue..
Chimpanzees include juveniles in sexual behavior..so that proves minor attraction is part of nature.Human beings share 98.8% of our DNA with chimpanzees because both human beings and chimpanzees are primates..
Thank you 👍learnt a few things that I would never of known amazingly how much a little princess entering this world can send the worry meter of the chart will be checking out a few more videos on your site
I was molested at the age of 9-12. I have always wondered why. Why they are the way they are and if we can fix it or develop something to put them out of their misery yet keep them alive.
As long as there is life, there is hope. I don't know how I managed not to be ABU5£D as a child. Maybe that's because my parents loved me for real. But it means I can't understand R4P£ victims. Besides I am a man so it would have been even less probable. Now even though I am not a medical P£D0PH1L£, I do have handedness in common, which I hope has no correlation with it. I became ambidextrous of my own accord around the age of 20 when I decided I would only use my right hand for writing, even though I still use my left hand for certain tasks
@@vultusalbus4216 I’m a righty but I bat (Baseball) left and also box left. I can also use either hand when it comes to hockey sticks
The first. You can't kill them all, it's all about nature.
The first. You can't kill them all, it's all about nature.
@@eigelgregossweisse9563 All right so you are saying that ruining children’s lives is human nature ?
I've read that pedophilia is biologically innate, thus they can't help if they're sexually attracted to pre pubescent ppl., but they can help it if they especially practice it w/actual prepubescent ppl.
It's a lot meaningless terms, what counts as sexual arousal ? Being aware of sexually attractive qualities in children ?
Unless you can identify a atypical property, I don't see the point.
It's ridiculous,
A policewoman tried to argue that because Collin's dictionary says Pedo = Someone sexually attracted to children,
that you meet the legal criteria by saying a 17 year old model is sexy. This needs sorting out.
Hebephilia being a mental illness is questionable. A 6 month old cat is not even fully developed yet, yet most cat become sexually matured at that development stage, and it's seems natural from the male cats to have the desire to make babies with them, it's the young girl cat who actually refuse to have babies. Not even a 1 years old cat is an adult, it's basically their teen years. I have cats. The truth is, we are not so different than animals and nature is weird, it's not based on moral views, ideals, religions, etc. And yes, I don't support this stuff.
Hebephilia and ephebophilia are nonsense terms coined (and subsequently revived) by psychologists looking to make a name for themselves. Being attracted to individuals in puberty is not only biologically and statistically normal but is probably more normal (at least when it comes to individuals in mid to late puberty) than being attracted to fully developed adults.
@@AM_o2000 Old enough to bleed old enough to breed.
None of these are mental illnesses.
@@jamesmabry5776you really don’t understand periods do you 🫠
Science or no science, being sexually attracted to ANYONE who not mentally mature enuff to understand the dynamics of sexual interaction is disgusting.
No it's not. Being sexually attracted to the SAME f-ing SEX is actual disgusting.
Anime "Even if it is immature 100 year old slut".
I would recommend.
Who are u talking about? Kids and people with mental illness?
@@michaelistoma8356 who else
@@AshrafAnam you’re weird asf trying to defend being sexually attracted to children. being attracted to an adult of the same gender is completely different to be attracted to a literal child.
If this is a type of sexuality, how can you fix that? It would be like asking a heterosexual not to be attracted to the opposite sex. How would these paedophilies be rehabilitated???
Maybe it's just me hating kids in general but I still don't understand what's so attrackting about them after watching this, even though I've learned more about the "fetish" itself!
Hmmmmm
I think what @Gaming.Gamer means is that he doesn’t like children, but doesn’t want to have sex with them. I don’t like children, either, but I have no desire to harm them. I also find it baffling that anyone could be sexually aroused by them.
The fact you call it a fetish means you may be misunderstanding what you thought you had learned. Something that is cross wired in the brain, relying upon the underlying mechanism of attraction, is not simply a fetish. It is a much more innate problem that begins early in development. Hence why it is called a developmental disorder; this has important implications for early intevention and treatment.
A fetish is not necessarily indicative of a developmental disorder, whereas pedophilia has moderate evidence to suggest it is.
@@valerietaylor9615Men are hardwired to find young people attractive.
Based on the numerous interviews I've done with MAAs and non-MAAs over the years I quickly learned that many people I knew were MAAs or were at least non-preferentially attracted to young people. Most notably, I learned a student and very good friend of mine is a hebephile. Despite being a law-abiding hebephile, he is apparently still an unforgivably vile human being according to Jeffery St. Clair, the supposedly progressive editor and columnist of CounterPunch magazine. Not only that, but he evidently share this negative character with no less a personage than JFK himself.
Why is this so? Well, it makes perfect sense to St. Clair, who has routinely displayed the extremist reactionary characteristics of the SJW. If some evidence is required for people here who are not regular readers of the basically decently progressive CounterPunch, make note of this comment of St. Clair's from an editorial he wrote for the current online issue of the zine: "I thought it was now incumbent upon liberal minded people to believe the stories of victims of sexual assault?"
That's funny, but he thought it was incumbent on liberal minded people to weigh evidence of any given accusation impartially and fairly, and to do a thorough investigation to discover the truth of such an accusation, and to act accordingly against the guilty party once that truth is uncovered.
One would think, of course, that if the problem is as extremely pervasive as the SJWs claim--and rape certainly is an issue that needs to be addressed and dealt with--then it should present no difficulty finding plenty of real allegations of rape to bring the matter to national attention, and making even a few false claims per year should be pointless and unnecessary. Then again, SJWs operate according to emotion, not logic, and are motivated by hatred and revenge, not justice and equality. Hence, clear thinking on their part should not be expected.
Even women who lie about such allegations are said to be performing an important service to the emergent matriarchy by giving a black eye to the allegedly pervasive Western patriarchy and bringing attention to this admittedly critical issue (according to America has a thriving ''rape culture,'' where all men who do not hate being male are said to celebrate rape). But evidently, according to St. Clair, he believes liberals are always supposed to believe whatever anyone who is female happens to say, because men are predatory monsters, and even if a woman does happen to be lying in a certain case, all men deserve comeuppance for the oppression previous generations inflicted upon women.
With that bit of evidence out of the way, why is he apparently a vile human being despite being a law-abiding hebephile? Because when he does date, he tends to seek romantic relationships with younger women in the 18-early 20s age range, if possible. Why? Because he tends to get along quite well with young women in that age group, and they often retain enough of the physical, emotional, and social traits of younger adolescent girls that he can still find them very attractive on all levels, fall in love with them, and greatly enjoy their company and appreciate them as people. In short, they have a multitude of awesome qualities to offer him as relationship partners.
Further, he does not tend to be attracted to women from their late 30s into middle age, and in fact he finds them unappealing on all levels. This is just natural for him, and is not a "problem" that needs to be fixed. There is nothing inherently wrong with older women, but he simply do not happen to find their physical, emotional, and social characteristics to be attractive, and he is not capable of giving a 45-year-old woman a fulfilling romantic/sexual partnership... and vice versa. Much as gay men do not naturally find the opposite sex attractive in a romantic way.
But why does St. Clair believe JFK himself shares these atrocious character flaws with him and other hebephiles? At another point in the article, St. Clair lamented what he considers to be liberal politicians, including Hillary Clinton, continue to support and/or revere fellow Democrats politicians who have been accused of sexual assault. He pointed out that among Democrats, Al Gore, Joe Biden, Ted Kennedy, and Bill Clinton have all been so accused, in some cases more than once. Please note I'm not defending any of these individuals, as I frankly do not know enough about the allegations nor anything about the various female complainants, so some or all of these accusations may be fully legitimate.
These particular men and the allegations against them are not the issue here. What is of concern to me is how St. Clair justified including the greatly admired JFK in the same category as these other Democratic politicians. I'll quote St. Clair verbatim here regarding his drubbing of JFK: "[He is] still considered a hero, even after his sexual relationship with a 19-year-old intern named Mimi Alford."
Um, did I miss something there? Alford never accused JFK of sexually assaulting her, or of using coercion to acquire sexual favors from her. Yes, he was married at the time, and I will not overlook that. But wasn't Alford aware of that? Is there any evidence JFK misled Alford into believing he planned to leave Jackie for her? Is it possible Alford may have simply been interested in sharing intimacy with a very popular and famous man whom she admired and found very attractive, and found his attentions to be extremely flattering and affirming of her own attractiveness? Apparently, St. Clair is deriding JFK's relationship with Alford solely on the basis that she was "only" 19 at the time. That isn't underage now, and it wasn't underage then. She was a legal adult. So what is the problem there?
Let me make something clear right away: this post is not intended to evoke an overall analysis of JFK as a person and politician, by comparing and contrasting his various merits and demerits. Doubtless a very enlightening and interesting conversation can come out of that, and many here will doubtless have some notable reasons for disliking JFK. However, that would bring us off-track of the point I'm trying to make here, which is this: regardless of how anyone on the board may feel about JFK overall, both as a person and as a president, is the fact that he had an entirely legal affair with a younger woman who was not underage one of the things that should be held against him? As in, simply because she was a "mere" lass of 19?
What is it with the type of reactionary liberalism of individuals like St. Clair, who seem to be doing a good job of infiltrating progressive organizations and publications in addition to universities so as to take control of contemporary progressivism? I think it's as simple as this: SJWs thrive and feed off of the victim mentality. In order to rationalize their hatred and agenda, they require certain individuals, and groups of the same, to be seen as inherently oppressed and "vulnerable", while at the same time possessing sufficient civil rights that they can enter the political and economic media as full fledged players. In other words, they need to simultaneously play the role of embittered badass warrior and vulnerable oppressed victim, a dichotomy that is totally lost on them but clearly evident to most everyone else.
That takes children and younger adolescents out of the running, as they make fine Victims requiring a Savior that the SJWs like to represent, but their lack of civil rights do not allow them to enter the playing field in the role of the Embittered Warrior. Women fit that role perfectly, because it wasn't too long ago in Western history when they were truly oppressed in many ways, and personified a paradigm of Innocence and Inherent Vulnerability that has since been ceded to children and (in some ways) underagers in general.
However, women who lack scruples, pride, and and self-esteem, and who acquiring power over others a better alternative to seeking equality with others; and men who lack respect for themselves, and have a need to compensate and earn brownie points by playing the role of Chivalrous Saviors of Womenkind, make perfect SJWs.
Of course, this type of attitude is not actually progressive but reactionary, and represents liberalism taken to its extremes. This is why SJWs have a need to demonize men who have relationships with younger women. Their mindset insists that no older man could possibly have any respect for younger women, and also insists that younger women have nothing to offer them as worthy relationship partners. The real concern of SJWs is the fact that an older man treating a younger woman as an equal, and breaking the strict age barriers our society puts in place, robs 19-year-old women of their perfect Victim status. To them, an older man and younger woman can never "break type" or rise above what the narrative says they must and can only be to each other.
I guess to them, he'd be a far more noble and decent person if he lied and deceived older women and deprived them of the chance to find relationship partners who could actually give them the type of romantic and sexual relationship they want and deserve as human beings. But to them, lying is considerably better than breaking type and disrupting the narrative their agenda is dependent on.
As a male on my 20's. I was buying ice cream from an ice cream truck. The driver let their little girls make me give them money and even though it was not intentional that my hand and her hand touched a little, I felt disgusted. I don't see why people are... you know what. RUclips will probably pause my comments if I used that p word.
Yeah after paying off an ice cream even what else happened wasn't on purpose. Ewwww!
There’s no way to understand this horrific sickness
I don’t believe this at all. We understand a lot about it already.
Pedophilia is a sickness that makes one attracted to children. What is so hard to understand exactly?
@@Chan-md2hb Well since you are so smart tell us how it happens. The cause of it. How to fix it. Seems you have it all figured out and perhaps it may be your time to collect your nobel peace prize.
@@dougfoster445 you think that understand sexual attraction children is likely accept sexual attraction children but is completely different. You can understand why people can murder and not necessary accept that this behavior is good
@@sergiorodriguez5913 Think it's a strawman. I'm not saying that at all. What I'm saying is that if Gay people don't "Choose" to be gay then pedophiles SURE as hell don't CHOOSE to be attracted to children. Think we need to study why this happens. That's it.
Came here to watch this as someone who was sexually abused for 2 years at 4 years old. Now at 24 i realize how much it drastically ruined my life so i always wondered on why? Why do pedophiles have these disgusting needs? How can you as an adult look at an innocent child sexually
A very interesting video and I agree with the argument that Ephebophilia is practially the same as Teleiophilia.
I find it weird how in the west ephebophilia is thrown into the same context as potentially destructive paraphilias that target children, when not too long ago, 16 year olds got married, stayed married their whole lives, birthed many children and lived relatively happy and normal lives. As stated in the video, many people with "normal" attraction (Teleiophilia) also find adolescents attractive. Note how Teleiophilia is also supposed to start at 18, a legal definition in most countries for "adult", not a biological one. There is really not that much difference between a 16 and an 18 year old. There is a significant difference between "being (physically) attracted" to something and actually taking action to get it.
In the evolutionary context this also doesn't make sense, since people who have reached a far enough stage in puberty are capable of having normal pregnancies and producing healthy offspring, as well as having developed sexual organs, pubic hair and curves, something paedophiles are surely not attracted to. Over a certain age in puberty, teenagers have developed personalities as well as an image of what they desire or not, including being sexual (so controversial to say).
Children can neither produce offspring, nor are they physically or mentally developed in any way, shape or form. They are small, vulnerable, in development and innocent. Harming that is clearly sick and dispicable, even more so in cases where the perpetrators are family or friends.
In the same sense, you could view mesophiliacs (40-60+) as somewhat sick, especially towards the higher end in age, but adults / seniors are mentally developed and physically past their prime, so it's just viewed as "weird", not dispicable or rage inducing.
One can argue that it has societal and social repercussions, as well as communication problems and difference in personal interests, preferences and energy at one's disposal when there's too much of an age gap of course, but then why all the talk about "girls grow up faster than boys"? What's weird is that insults are not only aimed at those who date below the magical number of 18, but also 20, 25 or even 30+ if the older person has a significant age difference. There is also a gigantic double standard that mostly criticizes older men, not older women going for younger partners.
A woman could post about being happily married for 15+ years with 3 children already and having married at 18 years old with someone who is 30 and older women would flock to the post commenting about how she must have been manipulated, groomed, molested, incapable of deciding for herself, etc.
If you're still going to get criticized by lots of people for dating below 30, what's the point in listening to them? Most of them sound like old, bitter and alone women who spread negativity.
Just like "marriage or relationship advice" on social media boils down to just "leave your partner, he's bad and you're too good", regardless of the context.
Complaining about people not being the same age totally leaves out overall statistical preferences where men prefer younger women and women prefer older men. Men and women have different stages of attractiveness. Typically, women are young, beautiful and fertile, men are supposed to be experienced, have succesful careers and provide for their family. Biology backs this fact up, as women have lost most of their eggs at age 30 and the chances of disabilities in newborn rise higher and higher with age.
Even more laughable is when someone who is 19 dates a 16 yo and people lose their shit over it like he's the worst person to ever exist, even though both consent to it.
I was capable of consent at 15, I might've not been super experienced in life or made the best decisions overall, but I sure knew I could decide to consent myself.
This overreliance on the magical 18 number is weird and it boils down to making good personal decisions based on parenting, intelligence, common sense and awareness in the end.
Westerners look down upon middle eastern countries because people marry early and rarely divorce like it's a bad thing (I'm not talking about forced [child] marriages, just young people or partners with an age gap who both consent in general), when it's perfectly normal in our culture to go "You're 16, go sleep around with random boys your age." and having a divorce rate of 50 %, not including non-marital relationships that break up, so most kids grow up without a stable family structure. Promiscuity statistics are clear on the long term harm it does on relationship success prospects.
If I had a daughter, I would rather she marry a well adjusted 30 year old she loves and who treats her well, than having a situationship with some punk teenager who will break up with her anyway, leaving her with psychological baggage and trauma.
I think the problem is not lay on how big the age gap is but at what age they're decide to date older ppl.
Let's just say a 30yo man dating 16yo/under 20 girls. The girls is simply too young...she still green and innocent, teenagers at that age still confused about everything. Plus many girls/boys at that age didn't find a person who's the same/around age as their parent attractive. If they're "dating" it's must be something going on between them and usually it has disturbing backstory.
But let's say if there's a woman 25-30 yo date a man who's much more older then them. Personally I don't find it disturbing because at that age most person are mature enough to think straight. At that age they already know for sure what they want in life. Some even have a stable job and own a house.
In the end it's never good to target a person who's much younger than yourself especially if they're still literally kids or teenagers under 20. I personally prefer an older man but there's no way I choose someone who at same age as my parents. Plus as a girl I already had enough of man who have delusion about younger girls. And pls stop talking about younger girls are more fertile and healthy to be breed or give birth. Even tho it's scientifically true but most girls and women are disturbed by that. For decades Man always see less value of older women and glorified. young girls. Untill to the point woman are refuse to be old and "ugly".... it's just sad you know
@@himeshira854 I understand how some might see the rhetoric around fertility as something demoting, but it is a biological fact of nature.
As humans our society is of course more complicated than pure survival and procreation, but we still have underlying natural instincts.
I'm not arguing that it's a great practice to go after teenagers when you're thirty, I am arguing that physical attraction is not immoral and natural.
I've seen girls fawn over attractive teachers, many women openly write about their teenage crushes way older than them. I had crushes on teachers and care takers up from kindergarden.
As is stated in the video, most men who are heterosexual will find a 20 year old physically attractive, and there isn't much of a physical difference from 20 to 16, so it will look attractive also.
While it may not be ideal to have too large of an age gap when one person is a teenager, I'd argue that's it not necessarily immoral if both are on good terms and have the same goal of a lifelong partnership, with or without offspring.
Manipulation can happen regardless of age (of couse more so when younger) and is always immoral.
Is it impossible as a teenager to fall head into heels into someone? I wouldn't say so. I would say it's worse to jump into bed with whomever from a young age and damage your chances of a successful relationship long term.
@@himeshira854 pause, having a hot teacher thats the same age as your parents, or celebrities same age or even older than your parents, all the guys in school started finding those women attractive at 13, i dont know what youre on about? Beyonce, Nicki Manaj, and Rhianna were hot topics when we were teens, wasnt a single dude in the school that pass up on them in a "smash or pass" game. Like what???? You cant be a dude, that or you done hit an old enough age where you forgot
And we had HOT teachers, that loved giving nice long hugs with head pats 😭😭😭, your face halfway covered 😂😂😂 i renember talking about it with friends at 15yrs old. If 1 of those teachers so much as winked at me 😂😂😂
Maybe its weird for girls but dudes, most of us definitely had NO ISSUES with people in their 20s or 30s. Nobody really wants people closing in on their 50s period... the 50 year olds still be wanting the 20yrolds
Like no, forget all that its never okay to talk to someone younger. Im too young to see tell if id follow the same route (25) but if some fine looking 40yr old wonen wanted me they can, i curb someone trying to stop it. Thats just weird, mind your buisness i aint you, your son, your grandson. I aint gone die the next morning, if anything they might teach me how to make better choices in life with their experience.
So like, what are you doing? Why is it your problem?
*Absolutely amazing point.* Well said.
there's nothing to understand about these monsters i don't feel empathy for them
someone that have been abused won't ever be the same after that
it's a ruined life
all these monsters should be kept away from children
If you get your wish of genociding people with a specific neurodevelopmental disorder (regardless of their actual behavior), then YOU will become a Moral Monster.
Russians call it pedohysteria, and the Russian website lurkmore has an interesting article about it.
it makes sense but it will never be a viable excuse, ever. sex drive reducers or castration are really the only options. there's no way to make society sympathize, even though they may truly have no control over it, so its a difficult thing to properly address. they need to have their own towns or societies because they just won't fit in with the rest of us, it's a fatal flaw.
Not really, I believe that most pedophiles are capable of controlling their urges and are harmless to children. It's the ones who can't control themselves who are dangerous.
I don’t understand how ppl suggest things like castration but turn around an defend a killer from getting the death penalty. Most ppl are just virtue signaling they don’t really care. Look at what happen the other day, A shooter killer 6 ppl in a Christian school an 3 of the victims were 9 year old kids an the media is more focused on getting the pronouns right for the killer instead the kids that lost their lives. Society is going down very fast
I recommend watching the video, or rewatching it...
That's should apply to those drag queens also
@@mhdfrb9971 what does wearing wigs and makeup have to do with being interested in children?
Idc what it is, it’s very foul. I’m just here for the comments.
How does it apply to women as most stats don't mention them. Is it a matter of general differences between genders?
i kinda have an autistic theory about it but idk
@@panchofenix9912 Please share...
The brain differences develop in the first trimester of pregnancy as part of the masculinisation of the brain (initiated by the Y chromosome). Which is why paedophilia is extremely rare in women (and will develop through a different route that is not yet understood).
@@AM_o2000personally i believe the fault is mostly because of p0rnography any kind, I wanted to see more and often the “dominated” either a boy or girl is very often portrayed as veryyyy young and its no secret to anyone that boys consume more p content because of their sex drive…
@@aldongeci4095 There is no evidence for such 'conditioning' and it is more likely that such portrayals reflect existing taste (online porn is effectively a huge anonymised self-report study on a scale that scientists can only dream of and whatever gets most views is more likely to feature in future productions for reasons of supply and demand). On the scientific side, the evidence is strongly in favour of brain differences that develop in the first trimester of pregnancy, and foetuses obviously don't watch and get conditioned by porn.
I don't know why, but your face in the thumbnail gives off the same vibe as a Moistkritical vid with a title like "This Guy is Quite the Doofus" and his face is in the thumbnail.
Agreed 😂
drake,you need to watch this
kris tyson, dr disrespect and many more
p£d0phil1a is the liking of prepubescent children. Literally only edp445’s case could be that
Lmao 🤣 yeah id agree 💯
The thing is, people who agreed that it is normal and not inherently abnormal for persons to be attracted to same sex cannot make any meaningful argument against this MAP
One is being attracted to adults other is being attracted to kids and that's a big difference
😮 keep them far away from our children!
They are really really trying to normalize this shit
People told me to sexualize since age 10, so my interest was forced. By law until age 12 I couldn't be charged. Age ranges are set out in laws
I want to create a cartoon that teaches kids and adults alike, that it is ok to be a freak, so long as you respect life.
How is that some sexual abusers are not pediphiles? If they are abusing a child, they are a pedophile. I mean they were arosed by a child, so that equals pedophile. That made no sense to me.
He literally spelled it out for you and you can Google it. Pedophiles are attracted to prepubescent children. Hebephiles are attracted to pubescent children.
I can't empathize with them
Me neither. But who would empathize with them. It’s like someone saying they hate p£d0s, as if anybody liked them. Why should you tell people what’s the obvious ?
No it's not anything to be excepted and yes 90 percent of pedofiles do at some point act the fantasy and if not physically they watch Cp which is illegal
Нам не потрібне ваше співчуття
@@vultusalbus4216ви для нас теж виродки
@@vultusalbus4216я ненавиджу вас
I would like to understand the connections between men who have been sexually abused as children, and their later interest in children.
Monsters like these roam free whilst there’s good people in the world who suffer for nothing.
I dont understand how it can be evolutionary when giving birth is something a mature woman is most likely to survive. I have seen the arguement that puberty is the sign a person is able to start reproduction but a womans hips must widen first or pregnancy is no better than a death sentence, how that would be evolutionarily favoured blows my flipping mind
Exactly
I'll tell you people what the heart of the matter and life in this fallen cursed world is all about: *looks*
People are ok with some young, attractive person having a relationship with another equally young and attractive person (even if this person is the most evil and abusive person to ever have existed), but the thought of an older person, especially if male (males are instinctively perceived as more threatening than females), especially if ugly, doing so, turns most otherwise reasonable and mild people into crazy murderers thirsty for blood (even if such person wouldn't harm a fly).
It's just like most people are ok with seeing a cockroach being squashed, but not a cute little kitten.
Forget about things like consent (the consent of people is violated all the freaking time in societies), laws (which will simply not be obeyed if culture/feelings oppose them harshly), etc; It's all about looks in this life. Whether or not you're attractive, whether or not you look young, whether you look masculine or feminine, everything revolves around it.
If a pedophile could, through some technology, trick, or whatever, appear to others like a child himself, all of his problems would be solved and not even the victims would feel any trauma whatsoever (unless he did something extreme to them of course), both because of his new looks and because of the lack of trauma caused by society's reaction to it.
You are wrong on so many levels.. omg...
@@user-ug6kk5ux5q So much so that you won't even try to refute what I said. Look, I'm not saying that word starting with "p" is something good or moral, I'm just explaining the real reason behind it being so hated.
That's.... interesting. But aren't kids experiencing s3xual stuff "early" harmful?
@@UwUImShio In the vast majority of cases, yes. I too think that that polemic thing is wrong, but not for the reasons most people think it is wrong. It's not because of "lack of consent" (even animals can consent), it's because of physical limitations, lack of discernment and introducing the person too early to something that is addictive and tends to escalate, which will also always be done in a non-monogamic way since you can't marry someone that young in the vast majority of places in the world.
@@mainlander3920 again, interesting. Thanks for replying!
Homosexuality started off like this. Hated, then people became sympathetic, then tolerated, then accepted and now promoted... we must never try to understand them or feel sympathetic for them as a society... these monsters must be taken away.
What's wrong with homosexuality?
@@Ashclayton1994 what is wrong?
The answer one looks for is all the people involved are consenting adults
@@MysteriousFuture and my point is that tolerance breeds acceptance.
Your approach is pretty much guaranteed to aggravate the situation. The carrot and stick approach doesn't work so well when you turn their whole world into sticks, and you don't have much excuse not knowing this. This being the case, it is clear that you aren't actually interested in what you say you are interested in. Stop lying to yourself and others about your motives.
Thank you for informing us about this subject Gibby
They are not addressing the fact that they do not care when they hear a small child screaming when they penetrate or the terror and tears in their eyes . It's not just a sexual attraction but the ability to torture children and gain pleasure from this . There is a sadistic element that they are not mentioning .
...you do realize that not all child molestation has to involve penetration, right? Literally fondling/tickling a child's genitals is molestation and doesn't involve any violent rape.
The vast majority of pedophiles aren't sadistic, they don't like hurting kids like that. It's still wrong to fondle and such, but don't assume that all pedophiles are psychopathically violent.
For that matter, the vast majority of pedophiles don't actually molest children. Child molesters typically have ulterior motives for their actions. Revenge, greed, stress, etc. Those who're legit sexually/romantically attracted to children (5-9) don't typically overlap with these types.
If someone is getting off on a kid's suffering, they have a number of issues that are far more serious than pedophilia. As a matter of fact, they are likely not even pedophiles.
If you paid attention to this video, you would've noticed that he said greater than half of child-molesters are primarily attracted to adults. Most child-molesters are not pedophiles and most pedophiles are not child-molesters. Other traits are just as, if not more, relevant than pedophilia. These other traits can include impulsivity, antisocial personality, and a general willingness to engage in cruelty. A pedophiles that lacks these (and most lack them) is not very likely to offend and is *very* unlikely to offend in the way that you describe.
Also, as the last person said, penetration is not necessarily the norm. What you describe is a relatively rare form of offending. There is a wide variety of ways an offender can offend, and the less antisocial among aren't going to do more than their rationalizations allow.
That's sadism
They should be watching Loli
How about we treat pedophilia, ephebophilia instead of getting the "kill kill kill" mentality? That way, humans would be more civilised then before. An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. Believe it or not, there's more than just that.
I am amazed that there is all the different types of label's probably because not in the medical industry just a worried grandfather who has learned that a child is 33% more at risk through a step parent
Nice video on this topic
This video covers a lot, and it's good that they go over the chronophilias as well. However, I wish it would talk about B4U-ACT which has gotten a lot of press attention too through the years instead of only Virped. VirPeds do not officially impose shame or guilt on MAA feelings, but they do clearly insist that acting on such feelings in any type of context would be so potentially toxic to youths that it's simply too risky for the law to ever allow. Nothing younger people have to say is ever taken into consideration if it goes against the party line(which I believe is one of the major reasons they want youth lib slapped down as a topic in the greater MAA community). Its message resonates with people in a way Virpeds does not: It doesn't feed into the stereotypes that automatically focus attention on the "MAAs(chronophilias) are inherently dangerous" attitude many of which the video debunks. More importantly, it approaches the public in a way that compromises and takes their concerns into consideration without pandering to them in a manner that assumes bigoted attitudes are always at the forefront of their mind, and in a way that plays into common prejudices against the MAA community as a whole.
This organization has, in just a few years of existence, provided for mutually respectful discussions between MAAs and mental health professionals who are open-minded seekers of the truth that are willing to take great risks, both personal and professional, to learn what is true and what isn't about adults who have a preferential attraction to youths of all age groups from an objective scientific standpoint.
Wait, so if someone has an attraction, but it isn't even their predominant let alone exclusive attraction, then they're not a pedophile or a hebephile? 🤔
There is both exclusive and non-exclusive pedophilia. Hope this helps :)
@@MaryMcInerney-lg4hg were you not paying attention when he read out the definition of pedophilia?
Teleiophiles acts of rape is forceful sexual act pedophiles act of rape is any sexual act, exposure or sexual knowledge a big difference you gloss over
sort of. Rape is always a power move and most times it doesnt involve force, but coercion, independently of age
@@PedroMRDS coercion still needs to be proven and not just because there is a age gap or because you have one example of it does not mean it always is
You can see example of voluntary consensual relationship that exists in one of my other reply
@Emily Laven Kids can consent yes but it is not morally right and I say this as an aethiest
@Emily Laven because they are children. They don't know the world like how adults do, and as u know children are immature and easy to manipulate.
@@h0zumi not all children
Be careful using open minded and intelligent in the same sentence Sounds like an agenda
So if evolution is true why wouldn’t this attraction be wiped out by now if it shows no benefit only harm
because evolution is not true.
Evolution is not going to care about 0.1 percentage of human population
How old was Helen of Troy?
@@Eldritchinator dunno
@@TheJoker-wr1cp Twelve. The sad answer is that life is brutal and people used to die way earlier.
hmm so im not actually left handed im non right handed... cmon really
Enlightening video. I find it very interesting what the researcher said about “cross wiring”. It reminded me of when I had my daughter (she’s 3now) I suddenly understood what people meant when they said “you fall in love with your baby.” I’ve heard it called “an instant love affair”. When you have a baby, you realize how close romantic and parental love are. I know it sounds weird, but hear me out. You want to be close to them/with them all the time. You want to cuddle them constantly. You want to make them happy. You want them to love you. You feel warmth and comfort and serenity when near them or holding them. You want that feeling to last forever. The only thing missing is the sexual aspect, obviously. Take that out, and the feeling is almost the same. You really do fall in love with your baby. Evolutionarily, it makes a lot of sense that parents (mothers, more so I think) feel this way, and I’m sure that intense feeling fades as they get older. By the time they are 6 you probably don’t feel that intense desire to be close all the time. But babies NEED that skin on skin contact, the breastfeeding, the constant love and attention and nurturing. That’s how they survive even as they get into toddlerhood. So your brain tells you all you want in the world is to be close to them.
So, how easily could this nurturing, parental love be perverted by the brain? With those two types of love being so similar, yet so different? Interesting thought.
Of course, this kind of falls apart when you realize that p3do’s are nearly exclusively men and I don’t think men e Perrin e that “falling in love” with your baby thing the way women do? But I could be wrong.
I found this video because I’m interested in psychology and I was curious what makes a p3do a p3do and instead I found this fascinating insight. Thank you.
Most child m0lesters are not medically speaking p£d0s. P£d0philia is an exclusive attraction to children. I think p£d0s are attracted to children because they seem more desirable, which is normal since they are untouched. Maybe it is the fact that body hair is a turn off for them. In some cases teenagers boys are attracted to older women until they turn 18, and then it reverses. How weird
Sex drive, libido & nurturing physical contact (parental) are not even in the same ballgame for comparison >it’s more along the lines of your libido preference such as, finding yourself being attracted to mostly tall men w dark hair though you’ve been attracted to a tall blonde or short red head but you’re mostly pulled to tall & dark haired men.
There are more women than anyone thinks. Better at keeping secrets, much more access, and don't cover the crime scene in jism.
These types of attractions are common enough throughout history. Normative in degrees. They can sublimate to higher orders (Jung definition) - but our culture does not help someone sit in a healthy way with the attractions. There are plenty of reasons culture does this but it is a fools errands. And plenty of reasons for culture to make a more sophisticated response.
Thank you!
im just tryna find out why this guy named drake likes me
So were all telelophiles
Haha right?
Technically speaking the majority of us are.
Im literally here bc im so curious abt the p diddy scandal 😮😂
Thanks for helping me learn more about Muhammad.
Praise to our prophet Mohammad (police be upon him).
@@expresspremium(Prepubescents be upon him)
Idiots
Obsessed with Islam
😂
I think there’s an unhealthy amount of people that look at the astonishingly high percentage of minor attraction, look at things biologically, as well as historical references that allude to minors marrying adults to try to “normalize” so called “MAPS”.
All of which are things to consider, however let’s consider the fact that a humans brain doesn’t fully develop until around 30 (studies suggest ages as late as 32-34) And to be attracted to someone who’s on the lower end of being fully developed? It’s odd.
Punishment aside, how can we better encourage a more healthy perspective amongst American family building culture? Kids are a gold. Gold that’s meant to be treasured and passed down generation to generation. Not pawned for a quick buck.
However big or however small, there is absolutely a percentage of people who are attracted to minors who’s perspectives aren’t aware or geared towards the special kind of love that only children can bring into our lives and society. They are the future. So innocent. So pure. What can you do today to brighten a that kids smile? Let’s not taint these kids more than the world already will and has.
The biggest depravity the world has ever faced
No, not really. Cannibalism is the first. Sexual is still sex and it creates life. That's not as bad as eating a human being. Murder like chopping off body limbs, chopping off the genitals, mutilation is much worse than sex. If its purely sex, and not the violence involved- it takes it down a notch, but they hate it so much because it's children.
@@eigelgregossweisse9563 children cant concent to sex.
Pedophile- is sexual attraction towards on young person
Child abuser: is a crime
Not all pedo commitnthose crime, even non pedo are child abuser. need to assess dsm before we label it as pedophile
As a child i remember my teacher sending us in a white van to a party.
In that party they left us with a buncj of adults with masquerade masks on .
Im not sure why in the early 1980s this happened and what was the purpose of chucking a bunch if kid's into an adult party...
Our parents consent was nit obtained
Seriously? In what school?
Trying hard to understand this. I can’t.
It's fine to understand as long as we remain violently opposed to the behavior. When it comes to the postmodern idea of hey let's just go ahead and do it, I would rather leave off with being understanding, if that's what it's going to lead to. And don't kid yourself. The bottom of queer Theory is the normalization of sex with kids. Read the postmodernists on the subject if you don't believe me.
MAPs are born that way.
Its a sexuality and orientation.
MAPs deserve love and peace.
Stop being bigoted and accept.
No 'maps' should get help and should NOT act on their urges. I don't think non offenders should be harassed or hurt but all 'maps' need to go get help
@@aishta7358 Not act on their urges? what does this supposed to mean? anyone who wants money is capable of stealing/robbery. Do you go around telling people "money wanters should not act on their urges"?
Explain more.
@@vorpalinferno9711 bc not everyone who wants money steals. It's harmful to children so they shouldn't touch kids.
@@vorpalinferno9711 what they should do is get help if they feel that way to prevent them from doing it in the future
@@aishta7358 So not everyone who wants children touches them. Also why are people bringing children into this? This is about a person identifying as a MAP. Children arent even a part of the discussion.
I'm curious on statistics on pedofiles offending because especially since the Internet i think it's probably more uncommon that they never offend. Most do commit and act on these urges it's facts and most of them are repeat offenders . I'm not saying there are not a few that don't but I would guess it's a very few because if you are fantasizing long enough on urges most people try to live out their fantasies.
Humans are fascinating creatures
Indeed😃😭
Oh my lord… this world is sick
I’m trying to understand but can’t. Adults good 👍..children bad 😢… like why can’t they understand this.
I wish there was a way to get rid of all of them
same
They are like Roaches. A Ton of them was Wooing a 13 year old Drag Queen
Agreed
I wish people would try to understand each other instead of hating. Your mentality dosen't help
Everybody has the potential for being a P£D0PH1L£. Does it mean you would remove yourself, like an infamous mustachioed leader who may have had Jewish facial features and hated Jews ? Because you sound a bit like him, sorry for telling you that. If I had a choice between being a dictator and a P£D0, I would rather be the latter because at least I would have the decency to spare people their lives
VIRPED seems to be down after 2021
It's up!
very informative it can help in protecting children better
Audio? Gotta go full volume? Good stuff though, ThankYou!
RUclips seems to really like this subject 🤔 no censorship here
Yeah but if you wear a maga hat you get zapped
Have you considered that education and factual evidence matters more than your feelings?
There's nothing to be censored here. It's science, not porn.
@@zeddeka science is the new religion. This type of science is what will get pedophilia accepted.
@@zeddeka I'm definitely using that from now on
they shot me with thorazine made it worse in Delaware.
There's no way to understand this horrific obsession.
That's why scientists are trying to study it.
people are born with it
@@SamuelSmith420 not necessarily, the video only said it's developmental
It's pretty easy to understand. It's a neurological defect
@@UwUImShio Cantor's more recent work shows that it develops during the first trimester of pregnancy as part of the process of the masculinisation of the brain initiated by the Y chromosome.
What if someone looks a lot younger than they are?
These people are aroused by the younger looking humans
YOUR POINT IS?
I didn't know that perv3rts came in flavors. 😮
Everyone has perverted fantasies.
It's learned behaviour purely grooming
Thank you for this! I'm trying to get my head around why my ex boyfriend was the way he was. I obviously recoiled at his enthusiasm and fetish for 4yr olds. After 14 years of being with him I found out that he had a conviction!! HOWEVER!! If I can get my head around my sister's bi-polar and the torture she has put me through, I've come to realise I can at least start to understand this. I don't have to accept it... I don't.. (bless my therapy sessions) but at least I can start by learning to be less judgemental and learn about this condition....
It’s a tough spot to be in for sure. I’m not sure weather to have pity for these kinds of people or hatred. No matter if it’s an illness or not people should know that harming kids in this way is a disgusting action and those desires need to be suppressed instead of expressed.
I would say the best way to try to view it is something like this: you know it’s not normal for an adult to be attracted to a child. And our entire being is essentially controlled by our brain. The same way someone who is bipolar behaves abnormally but can’t control it. We easily forget that humans are just organisms. And whatever causes an adult to be attracted to children isn’t a failure of character, rather a failure of their brain functioning…. Do we criminalize that? Or attempt to treat it? It’s all very sensitive and tricky :/ I myself can’t decide if I hate pedophiles or feel bad for them
@@ianhornbuckle9089 The scariest assumption would be to say that P£D0PH1L1A is a neurodivergence like Autism and ADHD
@@ianhornbuckle9089I pity them unless they act on their desires. Then I fully believe they should be castrated to be able to live at eunuchs. I’m speaking of the beings that are doing this to babies…I don’t see anything wrong with an 17 or 18 year old having a girlfriend who is 15. If they are in love and the boy is a genuinely good person, I don’t think that should be a crime. However…..there are so many people with such dark thoughts about pure, innocent children….it blows my mind. I know that we are capable of anything. This includes changing the way our brains operate. If someone really wants to, they most certainly can take steps to rewrite their brain. This has been proven, scientifically. It’s like a bad habit. Every single time a specific desire arises, do not suppress it but immediately shift it into another direction. One that doesn’t involve little kids. Of course, this would take a monumental amount of effort and inner strength but it’s possible. If someone actually achieved this, they would have the highest amount of respect and praise from me. This is only if they managed to not ever act upon them.
Me too.
I'm beginning to understand .........
10:07 wow that's interesting
I'm glad there are forums for these people so they don't become abusers. I wish them the best and the best possible treatment💚🌱
It's all to do with sex, the protection, propulsion of our species. The irony is, in the past the children HAD no form of protection from other predators, so the males had to get the girls to be married immediately, so as to secure their lineage. You had to rape, because geological disasters, etc the challenges the Earth throws at us, as well as other beings, definitely this video also shows why. We MUST also take into the consideration of spiritual aspects. Im not talking about religion. So eventually mankind, or the tribes noticed that this was detrimental, just as the way monogamy became. It was about the top 40 or even less % of men that had great genes, that populated with women. Thereby, there's many reasons why pedophiles became the way they became. They can't get a proper mate. They're not wired in that way, or they became they way through abuse. It was old wiring, old spiritual aspects that they've miscalculated, guided etc... but the worst thing is vampirism. Sucking the energy of children, or, the ones that are innocent.
If pedophiles were tortured, then they would think twice about associating themselves with other pedophiles, would have second thoughts about their fantasies, would have second thoughts about their actions… but given therapy, and hope and community acceptance, gives them a go for their crimes. Possible jail time is worth it to them. Jail or prison is not painful enough for them.
What about concentration camps for people we don't like?
@@MR-kw4oh you have the right mindset, but I’m Muslim, so that’s a no.
Not all of them are acting on their urges.
@@johncaze757 so what? They should be taught not to look at kids if they have issues. People with sexual thoughts about kids, need to learn that sin is in their head. They are not exempt from sin just because no one can read their mind.
@@MR-kw4oh just pedophiles, rapists, and murderers. Better than a camp, remove their hands and eyes, so we all know who it was and they can never look at another child or touch another child again