Same rag that ran an op-ed painting pedophilia as a harmless, victim-less mental disorder... not surprised by this fuckery at all. http://archive.is/nZcri
That article VERY CLEARLY distinguished "pedophilia" (an attraction) from "child molestation" (an action) and made very clear that the latter is definitely a horrible crime.
Now, why that distinction didn't make it into the title could be an interesting thing to discover... but please don't misrepresent what the article said.
If the article didn't make the distinction why should I? I find both 'pedophilia' and 'child molestation' morally reprehensible. Also I'm not your nana. I like giving links to relevant articles, and you're free not to read them, agree with my views on them, or ascribe to my synopsis of them.
I should add: If you don't mind my asking... why is attraction to children morally reprehensible? While it is obviously distasteful to anyone not so inclined, it's not a volitional act. (And FTR, no, I'm not so inclined myself. Just curious about people's thoughts on this point.) Also... did you read the article?
The article did make the distinction. That's what my whole point was. Being REALLY ANGRY!!!!zomg!!!! doesn't change natural law. If you make a claim and someone checks it out and finds it's not true or less than advertised, it hurts your credibility even if you are REALLY ANGRY!!!!!!bbq!!!!1eleven!! And it hurts everyone else's, too, which is what makes it any of my business at all.
So, just try to be accurate, to maximize your (and all of our) effectiveness. That's all.
Look, you're going to have to come to terms with the fact that people *from all different backgrounds, beliefs, and political affiliations dislike pedophilia AND see merit in this pizzagate research. I don't think it's natural law; it's a cultivated perversion. Once you start sexualizing children in your head and creating a fantasy with them, you're already 90% of the way to acting on the fantasy and doing children harm in that way, imo. I'm not Jesus, and my views are my own, you don't have to share them. As for being angry, I don't really get angry on this forum. But I don't agree with normalizing pedophilia, which is what I think that article is doing.
You have me entirely wrong. Just reread what I posted.
You may be right about the purpose of the article; I can't see the intent of the author nor the publisher, only their actions. However, misrepresenting what the article actually says is still a bad tactic, IMO. That's all I'm saying. Leave that crap to Colbert and the rest of the baby-raping wagon-circlers who keep straw-manning us.
So you're an article Fundamentalist? :-). I'm not, I believe news articles like most forms of literature can be interpreted differently from individual to individual. We all know there's spin, and we read between the lines. I've read that article twice now, and I see the same thing; normalization of pedophilia. Discouraging users who have a different world view from contributing because you think it discredits the cause is your prerogative, but not one I agree with. Thanks.
OMFG... where did I discourage anybody? I'm encouraging accuracy.
Oh... I guess I see how you could take the last part of my previous post as an attempt to just shut you up/down (same meaning... odd!?). That was not my intent. I want you to keep posting, just taking care to be accurate.
Think of me like a coach, here. That's the way I meant what I've been saying.
The article couldn't be more clear in its distinction between WHAT IT CALLS pedophilia (the desire) and WHAT IT CALLS child molestation (the action). The title... facepalm Total shitstorm, all because of the dual meaning of the word "pedophilia" in common usage NOT being reflected in the wording of the title. I think your view is that that shitstorm was intentional, eh? Again, I can't say; that could be right. It's just always dicey claiming to know what someone else's intentions are. Some measure of humility is generally wise, there.
view the rest of the comments →
Faustian ago
Same rag that ran an op-ed painting pedophilia as a harmless, victim-less mental disorder... not surprised by this fuckery at all. http://archive.is/nZcri
ZalesMcMuffin ago
That article VERY CLEARLY distinguished "pedophilia" (an attraction) from "child molestation" (an action) and made very clear that the latter is definitely a horrible crime.
Now, why that distinction didn't make it into the title could be an interesting thing to discover... but please don't misrepresent what the article said.
Faustian ago
If the article didn't make the distinction why should I? I find both 'pedophilia' and 'child molestation' morally reprehensible. Also I'm not your nana. I like giving links to relevant articles, and you're free not to read them, agree with my views on them, or ascribe to my synopsis of them.
ZalesMcMuffin ago
I should add: If you don't mind my asking... why is attraction to children morally reprehensible? While it is obviously distasteful to anyone not so inclined, it's not a volitional act. (And FTR, no, I'm not so inclined myself. Just curious about people's thoughts on this point.) Also... did you read the article?
ZalesMcMuffin ago
The article did make the distinction. That's what my whole point was. Being REALLY ANGRY!!!!zomg!!!! doesn't change natural law. If you make a claim and someone checks it out and finds it's not true or less than advertised, it hurts your credibility even if you are REALLY ANGRY!!!!!!bbq!!!!1eleven!! And it hurts everyone else's, too, which is what makes it any of my business at all.
So, just try to be accurate, to maximize your (and all of our) effectiveness. That's all.
Thanks for caring. I'm glad you're in the fight.
Faustian ago
Look, you're going to have to come to terms with the fact that people *from all different backgrounds, beliefs, and political affiliations dislike pedophilia AND see merit in this pizzagate research. I don't think it's natural law; it's a cultivated perversion. Once you start sexualizing children in your head and creating a fantasy with them, you're already 90% of the way to acting on the fantasy and doing children harm in that way, imo. I'm not Jesus, and my views are my own, you don't have to share them. As for being angry, I don't really get angry on this forum. But I don't agree with normalizing pedophilia, which is what I think that article is doing.
ZalesMcMuffin ago
You have me entirely wrong. Just reread what I posted.
You may be right about the purpose of the article; I can't see the intent of the author nor the publisher, only their actions. However, misrepresenting what the article actually says is still a bad tactic, IMO. That's all I'm saying. Leave that crap to Colbert and the rest of the baby-raping wagon-circlers who keep straw-manning us.
Faustian ago
So you're an article Fundamentalist? :-). I'm not, I believe news articles like most forms of literature can be interpreted differently from individual to individual. We all know there's spin, and we read between the lines. I've read that article twice now, and I see the same thing; normalization of pedophilia. Discouraging users who have a different world view from contributing because you think it discredits the cause is your prerogative, but not one I agree with. Thanks.
ZalesMcMuffin ago
OMFG... where did I discourage anybody? I'm encouraging accuracy.
Oh... I guess I see how you could take the last part of my previous post as an attempt to just shut you up/down (same meaning... odd!?). That was not my intent. I want you to keep posting, just taking care to be accurate.
Think of me like a coach, here. That's the way I meant what I've been saying.
The article couldn't be more clear in its distinction between WHAT IT CALLS pedophilia (the desire) and WHAT IT CALLS child molestation (the action). The title... facepalm Total shitstorm, all because of the dual meaning of the word "pedophilia" in common usage NOT being reflected in the wording of the title. I think your view is that that shitstorm was intentional, eh? Again, I can't say; that could be right. It's just always dicey claiming to know what someone else's intentions are. Some measure of humility is generally wise, there.
Faustian ago
PSA-You're not my coach or anyone else's. I won't be regulated by you. :-)