But, of course, as defined , pedophilia is incorrect; but besides this, https://slut.wtf/ this is evil. In a deep alarming trend over the past few decades, the pedophilia apologists tried to crush the condemnation of this terrible crime and criminal representations. They are very wrong. That is why.
Preliminary notes, july 13, 2019, i wrote the first project of the next essay on the horror of pedophilia at the end of 2016 or at the very beginning of 2017 and published it according to medium and quora, from whom it received rather a lot of attention. Since i deleted my accounts on the proposed sites last winter, this essay (and gambling others) was not available. But my goal, so that this is gambling in other essays in order to continue to circulate, so i will publish them here in my blog. The next essay, namely, is perceived by a serious person in the light of jeffrey epstein improglyio. It was, rather, a long -standing excitement for applied ethics as a whole, along with (for me) an incredibly incredible fact that people protect pedophiles. (As in the event with the philosopher g.E. Moore, in most of my philosophical letters, mainly in response to the absurd sentences that other people occupy.) When i first encountered this rhetorical phenomenon in 2002, when the pedophiles first went down to wikipedia i was just not able to believe in modern. My naive distrust disappeared through repeated clashes with pedophiles due to wikipedia. Meanwhile, i came to the conclusion that i was obliged to make at least some kind of medicine in this kind, so i reported about the pages of pedophilia wikimedia commons in the fbi in 2010 (which i did not do that i know).
Absolutely everything that is said, this is hardly a more domestic reason than any other - in applied ethics. I also wrote about the evil of murder, racism, anti -vitism (my neologism), censorship, safety disabilities and other topics in applied ethics. I especially like my essay about "our moral abyss."
I slightly rewrote the essay and watched it with some answers that i made for reviews with real, live pedophiles (they are on the internet and online and, by the way, quite shamelessly), which i hope will clarify my arguments.
Updated again on december 6, 2019. My goal is to protect the thesis that pedophilia in both senses is not an ordinary "bad", but also deeply angry. It is not the thesis of neither psychology, nor about the law, but instead of morality. Children below the age of consent). This is a clinical definition. At the same time, we often use the word more talkatively to mean (b) actual sex with children, then there is absolutely everything that is more correctly described as sexy violence against descendants or this is to say the same) rape of the child. 1
This upset how badly evil pedophilia seems to be understood. When i first sat down to write this essay, i was shocked by how little was available through the world wide web, explaining for what reasons this evil is. Wanting to help my goal to clarify this, starting with (b) actual sex with children. The evil of this act is easier to explain, and in displeasure on criminal representations, it actually depends on the evil of the act.
The moral horror of children's rape
raping of children2 is a terrible evil, because it injures the child forever. In connection with ours, you can compare with the torture and rape of adults; even as soon as the act ended, he continues to injure. This fills the child with undeserved shame and low self -esteem once and for all. For many surviving adults, such pain becomes so unbearable that other measures take everyday life. The specified can forever change the understanding of the child of sex. Some suffer, and this is the right word, from hypersexuality (sometimes called “nymphomania”), and some become completely closed to us sexual relations. It is terrible that this also does the victims more likely to become rapists when they grow up, which they call exactly what was called a "cycle of abuse."
Sexual violence against children is an act, so destructive and humiliating, and also humiliating, meanwhile, so shocking selfish that it is worthy, so that it was called evil, suddenly something evil: for a number of moments adult pleasure causes an injury for life.
Moral horror, physical shock and pain, the act itself is often inferior to the life of psychological sentiments and dysfunctions. The act of sexual violence against children is terribly harmful. This is an act, so destructive and humiliating, and in the meantime, so amazingly selfish that it deserves that in order to call it evil, suddenly something is evil: for most moments of pleasure, the adult causes injury forever.3
The main rule is too much - and forcibly say that anyone who intends to evaluate the moral of sexual violence against children, without discussing the terrible facts about these consequences, is an omission, perpetuating evil. The correct moral assessment of the rape of a child absolutely requires opposition to his terrifying consequences. That's why we must condemn those supporters of pedophiles who want to talk only about the positive experience with the offspring, if they were frankly possible, and that they do not discuss more typical and probable injuries that the act causes. Even in the case when the probability of injury was relatively insignificant, the seriousness of the harm happens so extremely that the act is completely not justified. The injury caused by children as a result of rape is such a factor that it is able to provoke a dissociative disorder of identity (once known as “many personality disorder”).
In any case, each discussion of the subject must make surely let the intimate with minor children - terrible evil and unbearable. Unfortunately, ignorance meant that pedophilia was not clear enough to be a terrible evil that it is. But no matter how definite, the shameless defenders of pedophilia really exist and can be found throughout the internet, how i will explain below (and, i am afraid how to meet the comments of this essay in the category of comments; but i answer the point in each case) . So, for the sake of those who are quite captivated in this matter, he must ensure that the rest carry out this operation quite clearly. It is incorrect with transformed children only when the son or daughter does not agree. ” We can answer that legally children, of course, are not able to agree. Sex with predominant children day and night should be considered rape. This is not surprising: the offspring are not able to agree, due to the fact that people do not know the nature of intimate contact or its consequences. But i am the brain that the most powerful answer is this: the injury described above will happen, whether the “consent” will seem to be “consent” by the child. Everyone who uses such phrases as if a child agrees ”, uses the language of the apologies of pedophilia and is highly suspicious. As a result, this is the design of many confirmed, repeating pedophiles to take care of children in order to win their “consent”. No person should pay tribute to what the child speaks in such a disgusting situation; the fault is also significantly reduced to rape of an adult, as in the event when the child says “no, and fights with. In a subtle way and my priority to give them a hat here. 4 although they agree that the rape of the child has terrible consequences, they insist that the link to these circumstances is not necessary to identify, so this is evil. To bring this moment, i click - how the eldest child is “in love” with an adult, and after long departures, she is just starting to be subjected to serious violence, believing that he enjoys this, as the asteroid destroyed the world. There were no bad consequences in that place. So, was there any harm to the girl? The act itself is harmful, regardless of the consequences. We, assuming the agricultural prospect of god's flight to the situation, cannot take into account the consequences, because we are considering the fact that to universal joy, briefly) happened; imagine that the parents of the young lady in heaven, because the world has left), given this. They can tremble on her behalf. It may not be significant what her attitude was sometimes immediately injured by her. To the question, as a result of which this is wrong? " They answer: "this is undoubted like that." This, without any reason, is the approach of deontologists to mass moral issues: correctly and wrong, for example, do not always depend on the consequences, it is not difficult to understand that sex is incorrect if a person is not sufficiently mature for consent.
as deontologists can also indicate, because of this, the law punishes the law of rape regardless of the actual consequences, finally. Children can be physically wounded as a result of the floor, there are stories when schoolchildren died from injuries obtained as a result of abuse. This can lead to pregnancy among the pubescent heifers at the age of 11 or 12 years. Spp can contract like boys, completely girls, what is the horror. Children's rape - the most common egregious violations of parents' rights to educate their beloved children, which they consider necessary. This deeply damages friends and personal life. And also, this contradicts the law, and the laws on the age level of consent exist for very good reasons, as i hope, i explained. There is a measurement of evil rape, which mentions a special mention: as after with young women, children can be enslaved and are worth sex in many countries.Which, however, the practice of raping heirs and the protection of pedophilia have terrible consequences of supporting this slave trade. It is estimated that millions of children are a many young teenagers, they are affected by sexual slavery, incorrectly described as “prostitution”, from year to year in america and 2 million around the world.
Therefore, the normalization of pedophilia supports not only individual cases of rape of children, but also an entire sexual trade industry for $ 99 billion annually; compare the film industry that has earned 43 billion usd in the united states in 2017. We are not only about an individual crime, but also organized crime. Some evil people are not primitively rape of children: they make companies to purchase and sell children for sex. This, of course, exacerbates what has long been unthinkable horror.
But it becomes even worse. There are a number of circumstances in which children's sex is not only among the lower classes, as well as one of the most wealthy and most powerful echelons. It is only necessary to investigate the cases of jeffrey epstein, jimmy savill, the nxivm cult, the den pedophila rings and other painful addictions. A criminal and moral question. But now i have understood that there is one of the very pressing civil problems of our age. It is fundamentally important that we do not justify pedophilia. We must hurry to understand this for the terrible evil that the beast is. Children better call “ebophilia” and “efebophilia” based on age. This difference can be made, but narrowing the scale of the term has a small moral import. That is why the word "pedophilia" as before is used as a general term. This applies to the crime of sex with the too yououng state. Let's be completely clear. Moral horror can attach as much or almost as much as intimacy with adolescents as with kids. One former criminal admitted, in response to this page, he applied, he applied with the life of a 16-year-old girl. A sufficient number of women boldly showed the great harm done by him, when they were girls -teenage, jeffrey epstein and his elite personnel of rapists (we are still, as of 2021, we do not know exactly who they are). The assumption on the topic, something that happens to them is not too bad to be knocked down with a brush of “pedophilia”, is under contempt. Writers ask for everyone to use the words “pedophilia” and “pedophile” according to the feelings determined by psychiatrists. But also, as we can not tell anyone our daily use of “fruits” on tomatoes, although biologists tell us that other measures are fruit, because you can continue to use these words in their popular feelings.
As a philosopher, in other words, someone who is trained in determining concepts and argument about everything, how much to apply the words, i want to advise the opposite: you can and must continue to use such words as always, at least , most contexts. In a similar popular sense, pedophiles are one who sexually offends the kids either who tries to do this, or whoever wants. To be clear, i do not say that it should be a scientific or clinical use of terms. I say that the daily use that i discuss here and which catalogs in many definitions of the dictionary does not need to reflect clinical use. Grade. Pedophilia is the best example: it was medicated, and all the same, obviously, this is terribly incorrect attitude that needs to be printed. Meet with children. Such a moment is also moral evil.
Some are trying to undermine a simple statement that this "clinical state" is evil. They do because the fact that psychologists and some are treated, pedophilia suggests that, since pedophilia is thoughtful, just a state of health, a porn tuning is not a peculiarity for a moral assessment. This argument is as much as you see in reality it serves better as the restoration of the premise; in other words, the drug of the state certainly does not exclude its moral assessment. Pedophilia is the best example: it turned out to be medicated, and yet, obviously, this is terribly incorrect attitude, which must be printed. The fact that psychiatrists who do everything necessary to eliminate the condition is to accept what the unbiased position means is hardly necessary that we also need to do this. Speaking here: desire and imagination of sex with children, also called rape children. The word for such thoughts is a criminal idea, since psychiatrists sometimes speak of a murderous idea. The subperson of people who write down such an object are a less popular position - to say that a desire, but not exclusively an act is evil. But in reality, most of the men are completely not averse to putting on him “evil”.Polls are not available, but, of course, the vast majority of guys will find pedophile options, like “evil”. The children are evil. However, this puts this into a sobering context, the practice of another, frankly strange and alarming, in order to consider pedophilia as just a mental disorder, like it is hardly a scourge of our society for ordinary users. Let's give that pedophilia, in the sense of striving for fucking with children, is indeed a mental disorder; in this seems to be nothing well ordered. But the mass simply did not give a damn about the slightest degree that a mental disorder is, that is, it does not scare people that the surface is not too much with pedophile brains, besides the fact that such people are dangerous for our kids. Pedophilia as a disorder as such, rightly rightly considers us a threat, and this is https://slut.wtf/ a monstrous threat that there is evil.
So, yes, well discovered, pedophilia is a disorder. But this is not incompatible with the statement that we condemn him as something rather evil, and not just a clinical state, for example, high blood pressure. I do this, condemn this, like all of us. Break small children. Rather, i put the priorities of the health of families and communities, much higher than any pain that is ready to cause the illegal desire of such a person. In fact, the priority of the first is much more that i can mention that the only important reason that most of us need to protect the pedophile’s mental health is that, thanks to the concern, we may prevent erotic violence against children. There is no other important reason. Sometimes it is more than a strong moral condemnation, but not sympathy, motivates pedophiles to more effectively eliminate their moods. Rap women. They fantasize about this, they watch sex videos of rape, they could closely approach. Some have already done this, despite the fact that others have never done this. What is such an individual rape. This is a label that we are able to place under the extreme form of the dsm-5 category, sexual sadism. Currently, if pedophilia is a mental disorder, i am a brain that we can say with confidence that ripfilia is also alone. Of course, to be an irapophyl can cause a large mental pain; it should still be. But, in such a situation, who care about whom: rape or women who are able to be in danger from rape? Obviously, the last, even if rape never acted in their desires. And the rape is a criminal idea, of course: is it not in the era in which the establishment is opposed by the “culture of rape”, we believe that this is deeply evil?
We are worried about violations of innocent children less than our company is baking about violation of wilting skin? He will say smug, you too little obvious objection: how does pedophilia happen evil if such is outside the human control? The short answer is that its use is not so outside the human control. But first, my task is to support a little. Do this, and similarly, when you should not do something, you will have to be free so as not to succumb to it. So if no one can fail to do some business, then our company cannot say which you should not do this; if we must restrain ourselves, then this should be the moment when we are able to limit ourselves. Well, in this case, we are ready to be obliged to do something outside our government? Such a nuance that pedophiles will not be able to control their conditions, these claims are sometimes used to make a definitely false conclusion that pedophilia, in a psychiatric sense, is not bad.
, Given the above, i deny the premise. I argue that pedophilia as well as the desire to play with children can be controlled.
Alcoholism is also a mental dysfunction, and it can be controlled, let it be with big problems. This is how to explain this i claim that alcoholism is possible very, very morally bad, in this sense. (Keep in mind, many recovering alcoholics sincerely agree with me about this.) Everyone understands that alcoholism is addiction, and i can admit that it shows the characteristics of the disease. But this does not exempt anyone who was captured by this dependence on any moral obligations. In addition to customers, few people object to a good council, which we should not allow ourselves to succumb to this terrible swamp, before the dependence will become so bad. Indeed, our company is a huge obligation in order to avoid this, especially if others in everyday family were alcoholics. Even when our company is not able to easily stop our family from drinking as soon as we dependent, we are able to stop our device from an excess, if a person is not dependent.This is a deep feature of the modern world as moral creatures with free will. Nevertheless, even then we carry a very heavy burden, and their work is a moral burden, what besides that? With addiction. Perhaps we cannot be accused if we are genetically predisposed to such dependence; but there are people with this hereditary predisposition, which never concern alcohol for the reason. The store has free will. When we go out of addiction, we will carry this burden until the dependence is struck by us. Then we will still bear the burden in order not to allow ourselves to plunge into it. To deny these banality, it means to deny both the general experience