ChatterBank1 min ago
Social Media Backlash Against Russia
I notice there are a lot of 'boycott the Winter Olympics' and protest posts against the Russian attitude towards the LGBT community; and quite rightly so.
Also we have seen a lot on the TV and in the press covering this topic ahead of the winter Olympics.
I wonder if this will be repeated for the World Cup in Qatar in 4 years time to protest against the Islamic communities attitudes to homosexuality - or maybe even closer to home?
Are people afraid to criticize Islamic attitudes for fear of being branded racist?
Also we have seen a lot on the TV and in the press covering this topic ahead of the winter Olympics.
I wonder if this will be repeated for the World Cup in Qatar in 4 years time to protest against the Islamic communities attitudes to homosexuality - or maybe even closer to home?
Are people afraid to criticize Islamic attitudes for fear of being branded racist?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Snafu03. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
"Where are the comparative attacks on young girls?" All over the place, if you bothered to look. But it wouldn't matter too much either, because this isn't meant to be a numbers game and I'd be repeating the same mistake you are making, viz. that paedophiles would be either homo- or heterosexual, or perhaps that those who attack children must necessarily be paedophiles. Often both of these assumptions are dubious: in the first place, I am sure that you will agree that it is possible to be attracted to women but not girls; and, likewise, to be attracted to men but not boys -- so that a true paedophile is, really, attracted to children rather than specifically one gender or the other.* Indeed, in general a paedophile is (almost) exclusively attracted to children rather than adults, so it is a dangerous mistake to draw conclusions about sexuality in either direction.
In the literature, child molestation is treated as distinct from paedophilia anyway, so the second mistake you are making is in treating the two as the same. Paul Blaney in his "Oxford Textbook of Psychopathology" notes that, "Some cases of child molestation, especially those involving incest, are committed in the absence of any identifiable deviant erotic age preference." What we should take from this is that various kinds of sexual activity are not necessarily linked and, once again, I stress that the picture is far too complicated for A-Level Probability to deal with, and that both of the assumptions you have made, that a child-molester is a paedophile, and that a man who attacks boys is homosexual, are at best dubious and are in fact just plain wrong. As far as I can tell, there is more hope of drawing a link between paedophilia and being left-handed than between paedophilia and homosexuality! (see, for example, http://
Finally, I leave you with this paper that cites a great deal of research:
http://
the overall conclusion of which is that no link can be drawn between homosexuality and paedophilia, including a thorough rebuttal of your own Family Research Council link from earlier.
*Intriguingly, the psychiatrist who first identified paedophilia specifially noted that the abuse of boys by homoesual men was not true paedophilia (see "Psychopathia Sexualis" by Richard von Krafft-Ebing) and was anyway extremely rare (though this was, to be fair, in the 1920s).
In the literature, child molestation is treated as distinct from paedophilia anyway, so the second mistake you are making is in treating the two as the same. Paul Blaney in his "Oxford Textbook of Psychopathology" notes that, "Some cases of child molestation, especially those involving incest, are committed in the absence of any identifiable deviant erotic age preference." What we should take from this is that various kinds of sexual activity are not necessarily linked and, once again, I stress that the picture is far too complicated for A-Level Probability to deal with, and that both of the assumptions you have made, that a child-molester is a paedophile, and that a man who attacks boys is homosexual, are at best dubious and are in fact just plain wrong. As far as I can tell, there is more hope of drawing a link between paedophilia and being left-handed than between paedophilia and homosexuality! (see, for example, http://
Finally, I leave you with this paper that cites a great deal of research:
http://
the overall conclusion of which is that no link can be drawn between homosexuality and paedophilia, including a thorough rebuttal of your own Family Research Council link from earlier.
*Intriguingly, the psychiatrist who first identified paedophilia specifially noted that the abuse of boys by homoesual men was not true paedophilia (see "Psychopathia Sexualis" by Richard von Krafft-Ebing) and was anyway extremely rare (though this was, to be fair, in the 1920s).
I should address one other comment. Well, two.
First: "...that the other taught in a boys public school has no bearing on the matter..."
Doesn't it? Are you sure? Is it not noteworthy that a great deal of sexual abuse cases of all sorts tend to be figures of authority on the one hand, and those in their control? A great deal of sexual abuse cases involve this relationship, and therefore a much more common link is not the gender of those involved, nor even necessarily physical attractiveness, but about power and control. "I am a teacher, you are my pupil," -- or "I am a priest, and you are just a choirboy", or "I'm a celebrity, you are a devoted fan". To dismiss the teacher-pupil relationship as having "no bearing on the matter" therefore, is to misunderstand almost all sexual abuse cases.
Secondly, you don't need a "world-class" statistician to debunk your use of statistics. After, you must have rated my maths ability highly enough to ask me to provide a figure. It's a contradiction to then dismiss my ability to understand and interpret the result.
First: "...that the other taught in a boys public school has no bearing on the matter..."
Doesn't it? Are you sure? Is it not noteworthy that a great deal of sexual abuse cases of all sorts tend to be figures of authority on the one hand, and those in their control? A great deal of sexual abuse cases involve this relationship, and therefore a much more common link is not the gender of those involved, nor even necessarily physical attractiveness, but about power and control. "I am a teacher, you are my pupil," -- or "I am a priest, and you are just a choirboy", or "I'm a celebrity, you are a devoted fan". To dismiss the teacher-pupil relationship as having "no bearing on the matter" therefore, is to misunderstand almost all sexual abuse cases.
Secondly, you don't need a "world-class" statistician to debunk your use of statistics. After, you must have rated my maths ability highly enough to ask me to provide a figure. It's a contradiction to then dismiss my ability to understand and interpret the result.
jim;//a great deal of sexual abuse cases of all sorts tend to be figures of authority on the one hand, and those in their control? A great deal of sexual abuse cases involve this relationship//
If this is so, and there is, as you maintain, no difference between the proclivities of homo and heterosexual groups, with so many homosexual assaults from such a small group of the population, (homosexual/paedophile teachers and priests and others) why do we not see a truly enormous number of heterosexual-teacher assaults on girls? In fact I can not remember hearing of even one case of a teacher attacking a young girl.
If this is so, and there is, as you maintain, no difference between the proclivities of homo and heterosexual groups, with so many homosexual assaults from such a small group of the population, (homosexual/paedophile teachers and priests and others) why do we not see a truly enormous number of heterosexual-teacher assaults on girls? In fact I can not remember hearing of even one case of a teacher attacking a young girl.
Just as there is no link between homosexuality and paedophilia, there is no link between heterosexuality and paedophilia either! It's a completely different phenomenon.
And there are cases of young girls being abused too:
http://
http://
http://
A book all about the topic:
http://
http://
etc. etc.
Added to your previous logical fallacies, it seems, would be selection bias.
And there are cases of young girls being abused too:
http://
http://
http://
A book all about the topic:
http://
http://
etc. etc.
Added to your previous logical fallacies, it seems, would be selection bias.
This took me about 2 seconds to fine. A father of two. MTH Khandro. This is getting silly.
http://
http://
"The group to which these attackers [of young girls] belong consists of maybe 98% of the population."
No it doesn't! You keep assuming that paedophilia overlaps with either hetero- or homosexuality. Not a single credible study has found this to be so. How many times do you need to be told that before you'll start paying attention?
No it doesn't! You keep assuming that paedophilia overlaps with either hetero- or homosexuality. Not a single credible study has found this to be so. How many times do you need to be told that before you'll start paying attention?
jim; In your constant attempts to separate pederasts from 'normal' homosexuals you fail to see that male assaults on boys is nothing but a HOMOSEXUAL activity, - giving it the name of paedophilia doesn't change that basic fact. Adult men sodomising young boys is homosexuality and nothing less. Just as male on female rape, is rape, no matter what age the victim.
I am not attempting to do anything. It's a simple truism that there is no link between homosexuality and paedophilia. One is an attraction to men. The other is an attraction to children. If those children happen to be boys, it still doesn't make it homosexual.
Stop digging. You've already committed about half of the statistical and logical fallacies in the book. Now you are going against everyone who studies this subject in, once again, confusing attacks on young boys with homosexuality. The two have nothing in common, and never will. How sad it is that you cannot see this, and cannot see all the mistakes you have made in trying to pursue and maintain your position, which, rather like the Skylon, is now being suspended with no visible means of support. Only, this time, it's because it has none.
Out of interest, did you bother to look at all the links I provided, including the ones citing study after study that utterly debunk your claims? Or did you just ignroe them, and everyone else
I leave you with this final thought:
"I do not wish to talk at this moment about homosexuality, but about pedophilia, which is another thing," -- Benedict XVI, as quoted by http://
Stop digging. You've already committed about half of the statistical and logical fallacies in the book. Now you are going against everyone who studies this subject in, once again, confusing attacks on young boys with homosexuality. The two have nothing in common, and never will. How sad it is that you cannot see this, and cannot see all the mistakes you have made in trying to pursue and maintain your position, which, rather like the Skylon, is now being suspended with no visible means of support. Only, this time, it's because it has none.
Out of interest, did you bother to look at all the links I provided, including the ones citing study after study that utterly debunk your claims? Or did you just ignroe them, and everyone else
I leave you with this final thought:
"I do not wish to talk at this moment about homosexuality, but about pedophilia, which is another thing," -- Benedict XVI, as quoted by http://
That's a definition that isn't shared by those who study this. I can certainly see where that idea comes from -- but an attraction to children is usually seen in virtually all studies that I've found to be independent of gender, and, certainly, independent of what Khandro referred to as "normal" homosexuality (his speech marks).
Or, alternatively, we're confusing the definition of a homosexual act with the idea of a homosexual orientation, a language choice that is noted in a link I gave earlier. I believe as a result, the literature tends to refer to "male-male", etc.:
"Another problem related to terminology arises because sexual abuse of male children by adult men2 is often referred to as "homosexual molestation." The adjective "homosexual" (or "heterosexual" when a man abuses a female child) refers to the victim's gender in relation to that of the perpetrator. Unfortunately, people sometimes mistakenly interpret it as referring to the perpetrator's sexual orientation.
As an expert panel of researchers convened by the National Academy of Sciences noted in a 1993 report: "The distinction between homosexual and heterosexual child molesters relies on the premise that male molesters of male victims are homosexual in orientation. Most molesters of boys do not report sexual interest in adult men, however" (National Research Council, 1993, p. 143, citation omitted).
To avoid this confusion, it is preferable to refer to men's sexual abuse of boys with the more accurate label of male-male molestation. Similarly, it is preferable to refer to men's abuse of girls as male-female molestation. These labels are more accurate because they describe the sex of the individuals involved but don't implicitly convey unwarranted assumptions about the perpetrator's sexual orientation. "
It would be nice if that "citation omitted" could be found, to back it up. Still, there are plenty of other papers cited in that article, one more won't make too much difference.
It is, at any rate, entirely possible to be involved in a homosexual act without being gay -- not least, one could be bisexual, or it could be an experiment gone wrong, or any number of things.
Or, alternatively, we're confusing the definition of a homosexual act with the idea of a homosexual orientation, a language choice that is noted in a link I gave earlier. I believe as a result, the literature tends to refer to "male-male", etc.:
"Another problem related to terminology arises because sexual abuse of male children by adult men2 is often referred to as "homosexual molestation." The adjective "homosexual" (or "heterosexual" when a man abuses a female child) refers to the victim's gender in relation to that of the perpetrator. Unfortunately, people sometimes mistakenly interpret it as referring to the perpetrator's sexual orientation.
As an expert panel of researchers convened by the National Academy of Sciences noted in a 1993 report: "The distinction between homosexual and heterosexual child molesters relies on the premise that male molesters of male victims are homosexual in orientation. Most molesters of boys do not report sexual interest in adult men, however" (National Research Council, 1993, p. 143, citation omitted).
To avoid this confusion, it is preferable to refer to men's sexual abuse of boys with the more accurate label of male-male molestation. Similarly, it is preferable to refer to men's abuse of girls as male-female molestation. These labels are more accurate because they describe the sex of the individuals involved but don't implicitly convey unwarranted assumptions about the perpetrator's sexual orientation. "
It would be nice if that "citation omitted" could be found, to back it up. Still, there are plenty of other papers cited in that article, one more won't make too much difference.
It is, at any rate, entirely possible to be involved in a homosexual act without being gay -- not least, one could be bisexual, or it could be an experiment gone wrong, or any number of things.
Well, whatever. Ultimately that's a view that makes some amount of sense but can lead, as we see, to people trying to link two things that are not at all linked. Children are different from men and women, and identifying young boys with men, and young girls with women, and trying to describe an attraction to children in the same way as you would adults, is at best confusing and can lead, as we have seen in this thread, to people trying to draw a causal link between the two. Sometimes, there is a good reason to be careful with language.
Latest Posts
ChatterBank8 mins ago
Business & Finance16 mins ago
T W A U ... The Chase...from...
Film, Media & TV16 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.