EPTIt looks like a satirical work. Especially given the spelling mistake in the quote on page 1. He's probably just a massive troll.
Pedophile's Guide to Love and Pleasure - Page 37
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
theSAiNT
United States726 Posts
It looks like a satirical work. Especially given the spelling mistake in the quote on page 1. He's probably just a massive troll. | ||
|
wswordsmen
United States987 Posts
On November 12 2010 03:13 ichimarugin680 wrote: No matter what its called its morally wrong I don't think anyone is debating that. | ||
|
tbrown47
United States1235 Posts
On November 12 2010 03:01 King K. Rool wrote: Why is it not fine? Some people can't help but be attracted to certain things. The fact that it's not a crime makes it "fine" by definition. As for your point, how does it even refute anything I said? Having a rape fetish is not a crime; both are feelings of attraction towards a specific sexual act anyways - the only difference is legality of the actual act, which is the entire point of what I said, that the crime should be hated, but the fetish, well that's just something people have. Just like how people get angry enough to think about killing people, they have enough control to not actually go kill someone. If you look down on someone for one feeling of attraction, but don't look down at someone else for another, to me that's nothing but bigotry. Is being born with a terrible disease "fine"? I wouldn't say it is fine at all. It is an unfortunate tragedy that people feel the way they do and suffer from pedophilia. But there is no justifying those feelings as okay. Its like me justifying being born with down syndrome as being "fine". It isn't. It is a horrible sickness, and it can't be dealt with in the same way physical diseases can be, which makes it even more peculiar and odd. I sympathize with pedophiles who don't act on their urges, but you can't ignore the fact that their urges are completely immoral and wrong for logical reasons. Children aren't capable of making decisions that are important and can be life-changing, like sex. That is why a Gay/Gay relationship and an Adult/Child relationship are completely different. The day where a child (when I say child I mean under 10) can drive a car, vote in elections, sign contracts, drink, smoke, etc. Then Adult/Child relationships will be okay. Until then... sorry pedophiles. edit: Meant to say completely "different" not "wrong", I have no issue with gay people. | ||
|
MrProphylactic
296 Posts
On November 12 2010 01:34 Back wrote: What do you mean "these books". You think you can generalize every books that contain a murder? In some books the killer isn't portrayed as a madman; in some video games you are the one killing others; serial killer Dexter is the star of his own TV series... Do you recommend we start banning any work where the offender is not shown as a madman or is that OK too now? Banning this book just because pedophilia personally offends you more than murder allows any form of potentially offensive (which includes pretty much anything ever created) to get banned. I am not agreeing or disagreeing with to much at the moment , but analogies as these are flawed . 1 . This is not a work of fiction this is a handbook or guide type format . 2. yes if a murderer made a handbook on how to commit murder and get away with etc, murder hand book , that would also bother me on a base level at least . 3. once again works of fiction , or educational programs or books are not relevant or topical , and the analogy just doesnt fit . I would not have a problem with peio-natured things in any of these format's . etc . I hope you get the gist I have heard these contrasted logic fallacies all-through out this thread .. cmon guys ... Now I am not saying , it should or should not be censored , well at the moment it shouldn't becuase it isn't breaking any laws . (see previous post) But still try to keep the analogies at least a little useful | ||
|
Krigwin
1130 Posts
On November 12 2010 03:04 Xanbatou wrote: First of all, he has to demonstrate that JUST reading the book causes EVERY reader to become a child molester? That's absurd and you would have realised it if you weren't trying to make so many loaded statements. Most laws that are like this are written with respect to the majority. It is illegal to drink while intoxicated not because every single drunk person ever will get into an accident, but because driving while intoxicated dramatically increases the probability that one will get into an accident. You're right. Okay, he has to prove that the book would cause the majority of readers to become child molesters. And I was deliberately making my post full of loaded statements because his post was basically nothing but loaded statements intended to get the reader morally riled up so they would agree with him for no logical reason. Also, a book that details how to commit a crime is very different from a video game in which you play a character that kills people, especially since video games do not involve details that would give insight into the logistics of the actual act. The difference here is the same as the difference between a chemistry book and a book about making bombs. You can use both of those books (well, you might need a little bit more than a chemistry book...) to construct bombs, but the intent of those books is very different. Firstly, that depends on what games you are talking about. Some games, and I'm going to use the most hardcore example of all time here, such as Manhunt, graphically display acts of brutal murder and exactly the physical actions needed for maximum effect. Secondly, while your point might be valid, we still don't illegalize books of that effect. Anarchist's Cookbook and Mein Kampf are available for sale, or if you want more recent examples, consider PiHKAL and TiHKAL, two books written by an actual scientist that explicity details how to manufacture highly illegal chemical compounds with common household equipment. Or since we're talking about Amazon here, maybe you're interested in building some homemade explosives? Furthermore, saying that his arguments are conjectures is meaningless and I assert that they are more than conjectures. Here's why: Let us consider two classes of pedophiles: pedophiles that dislike their sexuality and pedophiles that don't find anything wrong with it. The former will likely not buy the book, or if they do, will not act on anything anyway. What is stopping the latter from going and seeking sexual fulfilment? Quite clearly, the only thing stopping them would be the law. Now let us consider two classes of people: people that respect the law even when it conflicts with their desires and people that don't respect the law when it conflicts with their desires. A pedophile that is the former will likely not be driven to do anything after reading that book. A pedophile that is the latter and hasn't done anything yet clearly hasn't done anything because of fear of getting caught. Thus, a book that describes how to molest children without getting caught will invite that class of pedophile to act. The only way this can not happen is if there is no such thing as a pedophile that does not respect the law. We know that there are pedophiles and we know that there are people that don't respect the law. Are you really suggesting that there is no intersection of those two sets? Yes, that's just conjecture. Sounds fine but you have no evidence that that actually occurs. Come up with some evidence and then we might have something to talk about. | ||
|
ichimarugin680
United States182 Posts
| ||
|
xM(Z
Romania5296 Posts
shallow, absolutist morons standing behind the safety of their LCDs talking crap about things they dont understand from a 3rd person perspective are so win! if you cant put yourself in the shoes of all the characters involved in this story: teacher-student-victim just fk off. ones freedom kills the freedom of 39485734534534 other and everything is fine. long live the freedom of one in a society of billions! | ||
|
Krigwin
1130 Posts
On November 12 2010 03:06 stk01001 wrote: ummm you do realize sex with a minor is considered rape regardless if they "consent" or not.. he's suggested what types of condomns to use when having sex with 12 year olds.. so yea he's instructing guys how to rape children.. period. Anyone defending this guy's book should seriously be ashamed... I mean I love these idealogues who think they have all this integrity because they defend some child rapists right to free speech.. the guy is a goddamn pedophile.. he has sex with 12-13 year old boys... sorry but there's no defense for that and it's disgusting that people are trying to defend this book. You're absolutely kidding yourself thinking people defending this book should be "ashamed" or that they have no integrity. Absolutely kidding yourself. If some guy writes a book about how child molesters are evil and should be killed, who the hell would need to defend a book like that? Might as well write a book saying the sky is blue. Popular opinions don't need to be defended. On the other hand, it takes the utmost integrity to defend an opinion you disagree vehemently with. I think this guy, if he's not a masterful troll, is a complete and utter dumbass, but I'm going to go ahead and defend his right to write this trash, because it's his right, and no one else is. The day might come when you yourself are the one with an unpopular opinion and you're going to wish you had someone like me to stand at your side. Also, the passage suggests what kind of condom the child should use, not what the adult man should use. You can't even read properly. This is exactly why I and many other people had a problem with OP's phrasing, it's deliberately misconstrued to give posters a false idea of what the book is about to directly lead them into the opinion OP wants, which is just intellectually dishonest. On November 12 2010 03:07 wswordsmen wrote: Argument doesn't apply this guy is encouraging illegal action. I am the most pro-free speech person you will ever find, but even I think this book should be removed. This book encourages the molestation of minors by grown adults, which is unacceptable by societal standards. Allowing this book to be on sale from Amazon is the equivalent of Amazon supporting it. They are making a profit off of it. Okay. What if this book was instead a fictional story about a pedophile who then proceeds to personally explain all of the material in this book to an aspiring pedophile? Or how about if it's a fictional story about a police officer who catches a pedophile and then goes over how the pedophile avoided getting caught, outlining all of the material in this book? Or how about if it's an instruction manual on how to get caught, directly stating the opposite of everything in this book while heavily implying you should do what is outlined in this book? Where do you draw the line at when books should be removed? And who decides it? Societal standards are not good enough. At one point pedophilia itself was a societal standard. Slavery and genocide have been societal standards in the past. | ||
|
King K. Rool
Canada4408 Posts
On November 12 2010 03:20 tbrown47 wrote: By what you say, then "being born with a terrible disease" is not okay. ???Is being born with a terrible disease "fine"? I wouldn't say it is fine at all. It is an unfortunate tragedy that people feel the way they do and suffer from pedophilia. But there is no justifying those feelings as okay. You're also taking this analogy a bit far - they were born with it, it's unfortunate, but I wouldn't look down on them. "Fine" can't really be used here - if the pedophiles were going around sexing up every kid it wouldn't be fine, but they can control it, so it's fine. People with diseases can't control it, can't suddenly go "Oh well gosh darn it I think I'll stop having symptoms". Its like me justifying being born with down syndrome as being "fine". It isn't. It is a horrible sickness, and it can't be dealt with in the same way physical diseases can be, which makes it even more peculiar and odd. I sympathize with pedophiles who don't act on their urges, but you can't ignore the fact that their urges are completely immoral and wrong for logical reasons. I think your analogy is wrong, like I said above. You can control the urge to go and indulge in acts of pedophilia, be they stalking, taking pictures, or actually having sex with them, but you can't really control the symptoms of downs syndrome. I don't believe their urges are immoral and wrong. An urge is just that, an urge. What you do with it is how you should be judged. Children aren't capable of making decisions that are important and can be life-changing, like sex. That is why a Gay/Gay relationship and an Adult/Child relationship are completely different. The day where a child (when I say child I mean under 10) can drive a car, vote in elections, sign contracts, drink, smoke, etc. Then Adult/Child relationships will be okay. Until then... sorry pedophiles. edit: Meant to say completely "different" not "wrong", I have no issue with gay people. Your point implies that you believe I condone pedophilia acts (adult/child relationship). I don't, and I don't see how you possibly could arrive at that conclusion, or it's relevancy. Lastly, by your comparison you're basically saying you would look down on those born with diseases, which I don't think you actually mean. If you do, well. | ||
|
shell
Portugal2722 Posts
"This book encourages the molestation of minors by grown adults, which is unacceptable by societal standards." Not only that but it teaches them out to GET AWAY with it! That for me is the main problem! a book that tells people to cut a finger of a latex glove to use has a condomm for little kids should not be published and the guy that wrote should be sent to prison! Because at least in my country is ilegal to have pedophile material and man this clearly is pedophile material since it's their frickin MANUAL! i hate even the idea of this book existing! | ||
|
Rickilicious
United States220 Posts
| ||
|
Xanbatou
United States805 Posts
On November 12 2010 03:21 Krigwin wrote: Firstly, that depends on what games you are talking about. Some games, and I'm going to use the most hardcore example of all time here, such as Manhunt, graphically display acts of brutal murder and exactly the physical actions needed for maximum effect. Secondly, while your point might be valid, we still don't illegalize books of that effect. Anarchist's Cookbook and Mein Kampf are available for sale, or if you want more recent examples, consider PiHKAL and TiHKAL, two books written by an actual scientist that explicity details how to manufacture highly illegal chemical compounds with common household equipment. Or since we're talking about Amazon here, maybe you're interested in building some homemade explosives? Graphically depicting how to kill someone doesn't really mean anything. It's very easy to kill someone if you want to. If someone really wants to kill someone else, I'm pretty sure they could figure out how to get the job done even if they haven't played Manhunt. Yes, I know there are books for sale that promote other illegal activities, but that's what people are debating. I personally feel that writing books that outline how to commit crimes and get away with them puts you on the same level as an accessory to a crime. I'm not really sure how they are different. Yes, that's just conjecture. Sounds fine but you have no evidence that that actually occurs. Come up with some evidence and then we might have something to talk about. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hit_Man:_A_Technical_Manual_for_Independent_Contractors There's your evidence. A man uses a guide about killing people to go and kill someone. You really shouldn't have needed this though. It seems pretty obvious from the arguments that I laid out that this would happen. Reasoning and logic can go a long way... | ||
|
tbrown47
United States1235 Posts
On November 12 2010 03:37 King K. Rool wrote: By what you say, then "being born with a terrible disease" is not okay. ??? You're also taking this analogy a bit far - they were born with it, it's unfortunate, but I wouldn't look down on them. "Fine" can't really be used here - if the pedophiles were going around sexing up every kid it wouldn't be fine, but they can control it, so it's fine. People with diseases can't control it, can't suddenly go "Oh well gosh darn it I think I'll stop having symptoms". I think your analogy is wrong, like I said above. You can control the urge to go and indulge in acts of pedophelia, be they stalking, taking pictures, or actually having sex with them, but you can't really control the symptoms of downs syndrome. By your comparison you're basically saying you would look down on those born with diseases, which I don't think you actually mean. I'd rather have down syndrome than be a pedophile. And maybe "look down" isn't the right word. "Pity" would be a better one. | ||
|
King K. Rool
Canada4408 Posts
On November 12 2010 03:41 tbrown47 wrote: I'd rather have down syndrome than be a pedophile. And maybe "look down" isn't the right word. "Pity" would be a better one. Fixed a couple points in the previous post. If that's how you feel, then that's that I guess. | ||
|
stre1
25 Posts
| ||
|
shell
Portugal2722 Posts
| ||
|
tbrown47
United States1235 Posts
On November 12 2010 03:44 King K. Rool wrote: Fixed a couple points in the previous post. If that's how you feel, then that's that I guess. Well, your argument is that you can control pedophilia, to a degree that may be true. But you will always have to decide between actually fulfilling your sexual urges or going to prison for a very long time (hopefully). Is that not a bigger burden than being mentally disabled? At least if you are mentally disabled you may never fully understand why you are the way you are. I hope people can understand my point of view though. I certainly understand theirs. | ||
|
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
On November 12 2010 03:47 tbrown47 wrote: Well, your argument is that you can control pedophilia, to a degree that may be true. But you will always have to decide between actually fulfilling your sexual urges or going to prison for a very long time (hopefully). Is that not a bigger burden than being mentally disabled? At least if you are mentally disabled you may never fully understand why you are the way you are. I hope people can understand my point of view though. I certainly understand theirs. Not true. Many pedophiles feel attraction to adult women or are able to find sexual release in other ways. The biggest burden is knowing that you live with something that would make most people hate you when it is beyond your choice or control. | ||
|
tbrown47
United States1235 Posts
On November 12 2010 03:49 DoctorHelvetica wrote: Not true. Many pedophiles feel attraction to adult women or are able to find sexual release in other ways. The biggest burden is knowing that you live with something that would make most people hate you when it is beyond your choice or control. Understandable. It doesn't change my opinion on the subject though. And your second line kinda coincides with the way I feel, doesn't it? | ||
|
Competent
United States406 Posts
EDIT: @ The people comparing this to an uncontrollable disease such as downsyndrome. You are sick. Defending these people in such a way as if they can't control it, It MIGHT... be a brain disorder but not in such a way as downsyndrome, | ||
| ||
