An academic conference said that to be interested in pedophilia is “natural and normal for males”, and that “at least a sizable minority of normal males would like to have sex with children, and normal males are aroused by children.”
The conference, titled “Classifying Sex: Debating DSM-5″, featured many speakers who were in favor of sex with children, basically, they supported pedophilia.
The American Psychiatric Association (APA), (who also put on the conference) couldn’t decide if hebephilia should be included as a disorder. Hebephilia is the sexual preference for children in early puberty, usually anywhere between 11 to 14-year old’s.
The proposal became a hot topic due to the fact that children are going through puberty at a younger age. The current definition of pedophilia is to have an attraction to pre-pubescent children, but these children are not pre-pubescent if they have gone through puberty.
One of the enthusiastic participants, was Tom O’Carroll, a multiple child sex offender, a long-time campaigner for the legalization of sex with children, and former head of the Paedophile Information Exchange. “Wonderful!” he stated on his blog afterward. “It was a rare few days when I could feel relatively popular!”
They invite criminals to have input into what goes into the DSM? That explains a lot!
The Telegraph reported:
After a fierce battle in the American Psychiatric Association (APA), which produces it, a proposal to include hebephilia as a disorder in the new edition of the manual has been defeated. The proposal arose because puberty in children has started ever earlier in recent decades and as a result, it was argued, the current definition of pedophilia – pre-pubertal sexual attraction – missed out too many young people.
Ray Blanchard, professor of psychiatry at the University of Toronto, who led the APA’s working group on the subject, said that unless another way was found of encompassing hebephilia in the new manual, that was “tantamount to stating that the APA’s official position is that the sexual preference for early pubertal children is normal”.
Prof Blanchard was in turn criticized by a speaker at the Cambridge conference, Patrick Singy, of Union College, New York, who said hebephilia would be abused as a diagnosis to detain sex offenders as “mentally ill” under US “sexually violent predator” laws even after they had completed their sentences.
But perhaps the most controversial presentation of all was by Philip Tromovitch, a professor at Doshisha University in Japan, who stated in a presentation on the “prevalence of pedophilia” that the “majority of men are probably pedophiles and hebephiles” and that “paedophilic interest is normal and natural in human males”.
O’Carroll, the former PIE leader, was thrilled and described on his blog how he joined Prof Tromovitch and a colleague for drinks after the conference. “The conversation flowed most agreeably, along with the drinks and the beautiful River Cam,” he said.
There are so many reasons that this is wrong! I get that fine, whatever, some people think it’s a mental disorder, and maybe it is, but that doesn’t mean that people should give into their terribly unnatural urges just because they have a screwed up brain!
Even if it were consensual between an old person and a young pre-teenish child, who’d already gone through puberty, it shouldn’t be legal. According to mentalhealthdaily.com Our brains do not fully develop until we are AT LEAST 20! Some speculate even 30-years-old.
“All behaviors and experiences you endure until the age of 25 have the potential to impact your developing brain.” With that in mind, tell me why these idiots think that a child with an “underdeveloped brain” as they put it, can make a life-altering decision?!
And if the child has no say, then it’s just rape, plain and simple, which should be illegal for obvious reasons. Then again, one would think that pedophilia would be illegal for obvious reasons too, but idiot liberals seem to have gotten the lines of morality very blurred on that one, so can we really expect too much from them?
Maybe we are going somewhere with this, maybe being liberal is a mental disorder? That seems more plausible.
To suggest that something is normal requires a definition of the word 'normal'. If we define normal as being common or in the majority at the moment, then it's possible that they are correct. But if we define normal as being common or in the majority over a period of decades and/or centuries, than I don't believe there is any possibility of them being correct.
Pedophilia was never accepted except in extremely small pockets of society, throughout history. But society today is listing precariously to port and more and more so everyday. I believe we are very close to the tipping point where the ship will roll and immediately sink.