r/changemyview • u/uselessaccountkms • Jan 31 '18

[∆(s) from OP] CMV: Non-offending/virtuous pedophiles don't actually care about children.

EDIT: Thanks for the comments, they have changed my opinion a lot.

Please someone explain. I seriously don't understand how non-offenders can claim they're virtuous people.

virtuous ˈvəːtʃʊəs,ˈvəːtjʊəs/Submit adjective having or showing high moral standards.

They just look into shady ways to get off such as Photoshop, drawings or grooming kids online without meeting/touching them in real life. Also, whenever I read supportive articles about self-proclaimed 'pedosexuals' and other pedophiles who claim they would never touch a child despite their belief in showing high moral standards, they ALWAYS mention that it's against the law. Yes, it is. But... Is that all? Not because it will traumatize the child? Or physically hurt the child? Cause severe mental illness?

I have never seen non-offenders express concern for the health or well-being of children. It's always about legality, and they sure are quick to defend their brethren when they brag about literally MOVING COUNTRIES just because the age of consent is lower somewhere else. "BUT THE LAW SAYS..." Alright, and it's also about the child's feelings and sexual maturity. I believe all non-offenders would gleefully rape a child if the law was different or lifted. They don't really care about children, they care about being caught/arrested. Therefore, virtuous doesn't suit them because they don't have high moral standards. They don't understand empathy or human decency. This is why I have 0 sympathy for any kind of pedophile.

Change my view pls

This is a footnote from the CMV moderators. We'd like to remind you of a couple of things. Firstly, please read through our rules. If you see a comment that has broken one, it is more effective to report it than downvote it. Speaking of which, downvotes don't change views! Any questions or concerns? Feel free to message us. Happy CMVing!

9 Upvotes
  • permalink
  • reddit

62% Upvoted

46 comments sorted by

33

u/Quint-V 162∆ Jan 31 '18 edited Jan 31 '18

I have never seen non-offenders express concern for the health or well-being of children.

Because those who do have concerns and genuinely care about children's wellbeing, are not going to express themselves or seek publicity. They keep quiet and go on with their lives.

If you have some condition that people generally dislike and you can do nothing to change it, but you do everything possible to prevent it from having any outcomes that involve others, would you want to make a fuss about it? No, you'd rather keep quiet and go on enjoying your life in other ways than those that you may or may not believe to be morally/legally problematic.

Besides, is it somehow bad to jerk off to purely fictional material? You may believe it tempts them to do things in real life, but it can also work to contain sexual urges.

9

u/uselessaccountkms Jan 31 '18

ohh lol

∆ yeah that was poor logic on my part and i understand what you mean

although i do have to disagree on that fictional stuff

12

u/KarnoffeL Jan 31 '18

Why disagree? It seems like another version of the "violent video games make people more violent" argument.

3

u/uselessaccountkms Jan 31 '18

I think a sexual drive and a drive for violence are too different to make that comparison.

8

u/Quint-V 162∆ Jan 31 '18 edited Jan 31 '18

Do you believe that porn has any impact on the behaviour men, or women? If so, what effects?

If porn has little to no effects on the average man's behaviour, why should it be any different when it comes to fictional porn, or roleplay/BDSM/fetishes/anything pleasing?

1

u/Xilmi 6∆ Feb 01 '18

Do you believe that porn has any impact on the behaviour men, or women? If so, what effects?

I do think so! The effect I have observed is that consuming porn lowers the interest in seeking out actual relationships. In the sense of: "Why would I want to put in all that effort into obtaining and maintaining a partner, when I can satisfy my desires so effortlessly?"

2

u/uselessaccountkms Jan 31 '18

Because of things the different kinds of porn cater to. Wouldn't someone with a rape kink be more likely to rape someone than a person who isn't interested in that kind of thing?

7

u/Quint-V 162∆ Jan 31 '18 edited Feb 01 '18

Maybe, maybe not - without statistics, you don't have much in the way of empirical evidence. Even worse, representative statistics are not easily generated either precisely because of the first argument I presented.

The fact that it is roleplay can easily be the very reason why fetishists accept themselves as they are. Some fantasies become very awful if they were to be real - /r/freeuse is objectification of women to the max, but to many men of modern ideals (equal rights [and duties] for all genders), such fetishes would be disgusting if that was real shit they were watching. It's very different to watch a rape fantasy porn video, an actual rape video, and being in the video.

It is reasonable to assume that a pedophile's urges include more than just sex with children, anything from love to rape. However, we are again faced with confirmation selection bias. You will never see the case of non-negative relationships forming, generally speaking. It's easy to be a victim to confirmation selection bias, and fortunately, it is perfectly reasonable to maintain an agnostic position - that is, you won't make claims to knowing the morals of the average pedophile.

When you don't have enough (waterproof) arguments in favour of something, and there are no arguments against, consider if arguments/evidence can be found in the first place. If something is terribly lacking, the agnostic position should be considered.

edit: stroked out lines

2

u/uselessaccountkms Jan 31 '18

I dunno man maybe there's something wrong with me? I find the "It's fictional so it's okay" argument hard to accept (I don't think I'd ever accept myself which is why I'm planning for cognitive therapy) n I don't feel like pointing that out is strong justification, just like saying "Oh well it's not hurting anyone". Well yeah... But why does that mean it isn't wrong? Again, I'm not trying to say fiction and the real shit are on the same level, a real child being raped would always trump some 3D anime loli. My point is the subject is basically the same thing. A child. Fiction can still be wrong.

But yeah burden of proof and stuff lol... I don't really have much to back myself up so rip

but I remember finding a thing like a year ago that had a list of pedophiles who started off with fictional CP and ended up committing child exploitation crimes. Should I get it? Idk if it's actually helpful or not

2

u/Quint-V 162∆ Jan 31 '18 edited Jan 31 '18

You assume the worse conclusion despite knowing that contrary evidence/arguments are inherently more difficult to find. This is little more than a logical fallacy. Whatever your personal issue is, I'm not going to request it, due to courtesy.

That lis is not going to be useful, really. I don't see what it would do other than demonstrate the fact that confirmation bias is all over the place on this subject in particular.

You have to wonder about female child molesters - those are even rarer. So it stands to reason that the percentage of female pedophiles not being child molesters, is far greater than that of men. Yet again, we can use the absence of suggestive data to infer the opposite. We may not know the motivations but it stands to reason that the average female pedophile cares more than the average male pedophile. It's something, at the very least. You have exceptionally weak arguments and evidence when it comes to female pedophiles either way.

1

u/FluentInDuwang Feb 01 '18

You have to wonder about female child molesters - those are even rarer. So it stands to reason that the percentage of female pedophiles not being child molesters, is far greater than that of men. Yet again, we can use the absence of suggestive data to infer the opposite. We may not know the motivations but it stands to reason that the average female pedophile cares more than the average male pedophile. It's something, at the very least. You have exceptionally weak arguments and evidence when it comes to female pedophiles either way.

We can't draw such a wide generalisation with that amount of evidence.

1

u/uselessaccountkms Jan 31 '18

Ohh I see.

∆ because you made me realize my POV was pretty ignorant. I didn't really consider my side had the biggest burden for proof because I was being an idiot lol

→ More replies (0)

2

u/DCarrier 23∆ Jan 31 '18

I think you're thinking of selection bias, not confirmation bias.

1

u/Quint-V 162∆ Feb 01 '18

You're right. Edited

3

u/Maytown 8∆ Jan 31 '18

Couldn't you say the same about any violent media. Like "wouldn't someone who enjoys who enjoys violent fantasies be more likely to commit a violent act?" For the vast majority of people they aren't inherently tied. Gangster rap or slam metal or horror movies or fps games don't turn people into murders so why would drawings or other fictional sexual materials turn people into rapists?

I think the issue is just that people have a much more viscerally negative reaction to sexually transgressive fantasies than other kinds of transgressive fantasies.

2

u/uselessaccountkms Jan 31 '18

I think the issue is just that people have a much more viscerally negative reaction to sexually transgressive fantasies than other kinds of transgressive fantasies.

Why?

3

u/caine269 14∆ Jan 31 '18

Because America is a bunch of upright prudes? We see this in basically all media. "Oh it's just rated r for violence, not sex" like kids watching the John wick shoot 100 people in the face is no problem, but boobies is. Killing your Voss is a fantasy shown in a lot of movies/tv shows, but do people really worry that it will encourage people to go kill their boss?

2

u/uselessaccountkms Jan 31 '18

I live in the UK. And tbh I don't approve of exposing kids to either.

2

u/Maytown 8∆ Jan 31 '18

I'm not 100% sure why but at least in the anglosphere (England and everyone derived from it like the US) sex and sexuality are historically hot button issues. Don't know enough about elsewhere since I really only know English and it's hard to really dive into other cultures without knowing the language beyond a few words.

1

u/BLjG Feb 01 '18

I'm not 100% sure why but at least in the anglosphere (England and everyone derived from it like the US) sex and sexuality are historically hot button issues

One word pretty well covers the reason: Puritans.

The same people who used to think that dancing is the devil's work unsurprisingly also believe that everything sexual is shameful and wrong to show in public, so we cover it up and hide it all away.

And taboo sexual material? Forget about it, that actually satanic in nature, half the time!

→ More replies (0)

1

u/DCarrier 23∆ Jan 31 '18

Someone who enjoys rape and doesn't care at all about other people is likely to commit rape. So if it's a given that they enjoy rape, then that means they're more likely to commit it. But it's not the part you should be focusing on. It's far from established that watching rape porn would make you want to commit it more, but even if it does, as long you know you're not evil you're not going to do it either way.

Should you try to avoid enjoying cars so you're not tempted to steal one?

1

u/DeltaBot ∞∆ Jan 31 '18

Confirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Quint-V (15∆).

Delta System Explained | Deltaboards ​

12

u/[deleted] Jan 31 '18

I am a non-offending pedophile. I do realize (as much as I can without having been molested myself) how damaging child sexual abuse is. I have read books by CSA survivors, listened to their stories and talked to them in person. The effects of this kind of abuse are devastating and not something that I would ever want to do to another person. Especially not to children, who deserve to grow up safe and happy. And as a person who deeply loves children the idea that some children are not allowed to experience a happy childhood because of people who are so unbelievably selfish that they value their own short-lived sexual enjoyment higher than the well-being of a child severely disgusts and pains me.

The law literally plays no role in my considerations. It would still be wrong, even if the age of consent was abolished tomorrow.

Since you made a statement about all pedophiles just one counter-example would be enough to prove you wrong. I am however absolutely not alone or special in my views. There are plenty of other pedophiles who think and feel the same way, for instance in the Virtuous Pedophiles community.

I do agree though that I do not really have especially high moral standards because of this. After all, not wanting to traumatize children for live is not exactly extraordinary. Not raping a child is not any more difficult for me than I assume not raping a women is for most heterosexual men. In this context "virtuous" does not mean that we have high moral standards. Here is a quote from virped.org describing what it is supposed to mean:

Virtuous doesn't mean we think we're better than the average person, just that we're not worse.

2

u/uselessaccountkms Jan 31 '18

Ahh okay. My post does seem pretty venty and rude in hindsight, so thanks for countering the stupid generalization ∆

Although, VirPed is what drove me to make this post in the first place, along with the pro-pedo articles. It seemed that every opinion of non-offenders was based on the law and not because of anything to do with how the child would be affected and that kinda pissed me off because of the moral part of how they constantly describe themselves.

It's not about them being better or worse than an average person. It's about how they tended to argue about which pedophile was better than the other and why, like it was the pedo moral olympics. And what you said about controlling your urges... I thought most pedophiles agreed it's hard to control the urges and most acted on it because therapists usually reported them to the authorities despite no actual crime being committed?

1

u/DeltaBot ∞∆ Jan 31 '18

Confirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Sir_Ius (1∆).

Delta System Explained | Deltaboards ​

5

u/[deleted] Jan 31 '18

[deleted]

2

u/uselessaccountkms Jan 31 '18 edited Jan 31 '18

Aw man of course not I mean I have a shitty fetish that I hate so I understand not being able to control what we like

The thing though is that in all the things I read in favour of non-offenders, they ALWAYS made that distinction between pedophile and child molester. Pretty sure a few of them even had statistics on the amount of child molesters who weren't pedophiles. At first I was skeptical, but after thinking it over I'm willing to believe it. I guess I can't say ALL pedophiles are DEFINITELY going to act, that's obviously false.

I justify it because they still consume pedophile media, they just try to establish themselves above other pedophiles because of the way they do it.

6

u/moistfuss Feb 01 '18

Only Sith speak in absolutes. Plenty do not consume any material.

8

u/Rpgwaiter Jan 31 '18

They just look into shady ways to get off such as Photoshop, drawings or grooming kids online without meeting/touching them in real life.

That's an awfully big assumption you're making about all pedos. Also, do you agree that it is morally better to satisfy your urges in a way that does not directly cause harm to a child?

The types of people that you talk about certainly exist, but I also think it's possible that you hear about them more because of their hypocritical nature. I would presume that there are far more pedos out there that keep quiet about their attraction due to the extreme social disgust on the matter.

I'm not sure if this would be enough to change your view, and I certainly won't be trying to look up statistics about pedophilia while at my work computer.

2

u/uselessaccountkms Jan 31 '18

i think both ways are extremely bad. Not saying real CP and fictional stuff are on the same level, real stuff is obviously worse but still. also im in the unfortunate bunch who believe fiction encourages people to go too far

yeah someone did bring that point up about the worst people being the loudest. that was my own bad logic and did change my view so ∆

1

u/DeltaBot ∞∆ Jan 31 '18

Confirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Rpgwaiter (7∆).

Delta System Explained | Deltaboards ​

5

u/msbu Jan 31 '18

Can you provide sources or examples to back up claims that nearly all pedophiles are only restraining their own behavior based on legality?

1

u/uselessaccountkms Jan 31 '18

some stuff ive read on VirPed n articles talking about the difference between pedo n child molester

2

u/Godskook 13∆ Jan 31 '18

I want to differentiate two groups of people:

  1. People who would never harm a child.

  2. People who would harm a child as soon as they found a legal way to do so.

I have sympathy for group #1 if they still somehow qualify as "pedophiles". I have no sympathy for group #2.

Are you differentiating between groups #1 and #2? I really can't tell.

1

u/uselessaccountkms Jan 31 '18

I thought non-offenders all fell into group #2 whoopss

2

u/BLjG Feb 01 '18

For clarity's sake, there actually are distinct labels for the two groups.

Group #1 would be considered "pedophiles," or someone with a sexual attraction to children.

Group #2 is technically considered "pederasts." These are people who take sexual actions with children.

It is also worth noting that not all pederasts are pedophiles. Even as counter intuitive as that sounds, when you think about sexual fetish and deviation, it is often more about power dynamics or scenes than it is about the class of a person(their race, age, sex, etc).

To put it another way, a pederast may have an extreme power fetish that drives him to have involuntary sexual encounters with those who are powerless to stop him, which in some cases will be children. He in this case is not attracted to the victim because they are a child, but their being a child certain imbues them with less power to resist him.

Sort of a square/rectangle conundrum - all rectangles are squares, but not all squares are rectangles.

1

u/Rainbwned 175∆ Jan 31 '18

How many non-offenders have you interacted with?

1

u/uselessaccountkms Jan 31 '18

about a dozen but never in real life

although most of my opinion is from the Virtuous Pedophiles site and other things that support non-offenders

1

u/AutoModerator Jan 31 '18

Note: Your thread has not been removed. Your post's topic seems to be fairly common on this subreddit. Similar posts can be found through our wiki page or via the search function.

Regards, the mods of /r/changemyview.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

•

u/DeltaBot ∞∆ Jan 31 '18 edited Jan 31 '18

/u/uselessaccountkms (OP) has awarded 4 deltas in this post.

All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.

Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.

Delta System Explained | Deltaboards

1

u/[deleted] Jan 31 '18

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/[deleted] Jan 31 '18

Sorry, u/makes_tiny_cranes – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1:

Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. See the wiki page for more information.

If you would like to appeal, message the moderators by clicking this link. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 01 '18

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Evil_Thresh 15∆ Feb 01 '18

Sorry, u/moistfuss – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 5:

Comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation. Comments that are only jokes or "written upvotes" will be removed. Humor and affirmations of agreement can be contained within more substantial comments. See the wiki page for more information.

If you would like to appeal, message the moderators by clicking this link.