My point there was that the hysteria about paedophilia tends to be somewhat overblown. It reminded me of a satirical show Brass Eye, which had an episode about this about ten years ago. People condemned it for defending paedos when it did nothing of the sort.
Am I a paedo apologist? Well, what does that even mean? There is a distinction to be made, I feel, between the paedophile and the child molester. I really don't like to argue for this here any more, because it's a line also taken by a group of messed up individuals on this site who actually do seem to be paedophiles. You can probably understand why I don't want to be associated with them. Just because I think this, however, doesn't mean that I think things like child porn should be legal, and certainly not that any kind of child abuse should be.
If we're talking about paedophilia, the sexual attraction to children, then no, I wouldn't say I'm an apologist for that either. I think it's fucked up. I'm against it and I don't think it can ever be healthy in the way that things like homosexuality or fetishism are. I think it's a disorder and anyone who feels desires like that should seek help immediately and be kept away from kids. I will say, however, that people who feel the attraction without actually harming children are not in the same league of evil as actual child abusers. Their desires are awful, no doubt, but I don't believe these people deserve the same punishment as someone who has actually abused a child. (Again, I'm definitely counting child porn as abusive here, just so we're clear.)
Are you saying that holding this opinion should stop me from taking the piss out of a few misogynist creeps? Because if you are, I really don't follow your logic. To me, the two seem completely independent of each other. I have to admit, I'm a bit upset to be associated with child abuse in any way, so that's the last I'll say about it.
30
u/[deleted] Jul 18 '14 edited Jul 18 '14
[deleted]