I'm not a great believer in drawing lines, but this is a risky area to start blurring lines. Most child sexual abuse is violent and unwanted. A child has no understanding of sexual desires. The comparison to LGBT is way off target because there we are talking about consenting adults and trying to tag this on because acceptance is finally coming for them is appalling.
The lines blur as children approach adulthood and this is why young teenagers who are sexually active with each other aren't punished. Towards this age each case should be investigated individually as even a 16 year old could be undeveloped enough for sexual encounters.
That last article was particularly disturbing. While I agree that someone who has not offended should not be punished, if paedophilia is touted as acceptable then those who don't offend may start feel they have free reign to offend.
In my opinion if you put yourself in a situation of temptation when you know it's the wrong thing, you aren't helping yourself. Why would you choose to become a youth worker if you know you're sexually attracted to children?
I'm not a great believer in drawing lines, but this is a risky area to start blurring lines.
Exactly! So I have to further explore the question as to why now, there is a push for the acceptance of having paedophilia exist on a spectrum. Being a paedophile is an indelible danger to children, regardless of what MAPs and "non-offending" paedophiles try to say.
Why would you choose to become a youth worker if you know you're sexually attracted to children?
Us "paedophobes" know that this is a rhetorical question. I found this recent lecture video by Jordan Peterson really hit the nail on the head.
Thanks for your comment.