Why is pedophilia considered a mental disorder, but homosexuality isn't?

Why should homosexuality be considered a mental disorder?

Because pedophilia is criminal in nature and involves children who are not able to consent as victims.

Short answer

Because there’s nothing wrong with homosexuality.

Long Answer

Pedophilia is only considered a disorder when it (1) causes feelings of guilt, anxiety, or alienation in the individual, (2) interferes with ordinary life activities, or (3) causes the individual to pursue children for sexual gratification (just because someone is attracted to children doesn’t mean they act on it). In short, it’s a mental disorder because it is something to struggle against and can potentially cause harm. Homosexuality, meanwhile, does not cause any harm. And the only thing that gays and lesbians need to struggle against is their oppressors.

I suppose it depends on who you ask and what their POV is.

Children cannot give proper consent.

They cannot be compared and belong to totally different categories.

Because one involves rape and the other does not.

Just curious here. Why do you rockfan, think homosexuality should be classified as a mental disorder?

@johnpowell I didn’t read it that way; I took it as just asking for opinions, and a little bit to clear up an apparent double standard. But I can see how those who do hold that opinion might;

Up until relatively recently, even the medical community at large considered it a mental disorder. The American Psychiatric Association considered it thusly until 1973, and the WHO didn’t change their mind until 1990. As the anti-vax and “flat Earth” crowd demonstrate, there are some people who are quite resistant to advances in science, whether it be ecology, biology, or alcohology. Those who think the world is much the same as it was decades ago may hold some rather outdated ideas, especially if those ideas line up with their own biases.

Pedophilia is a compulsion to interact sexually with non-consenting children. Any uncontrollable compulsion is a mental disorder. Homosexuality is a biological preference and involves consenting partners. Pedophiles cause great harm, mentally, emotionally and physically to their victims and the nature of their issues are almost always untreatable, therefore they should be euthanized.

Yes, you heard me right, gassed, garroted, shot, hung, buried alive, whatever it takes to put an end to the suffering they perpetrate. Same goes for all deviant sexual predators, rapists, etc.

Why do some people think the answer to certain problems is to be as barbaric as possible?

@Darth_Algar I am assuming you are referring to my sharings above. ?
Partly I am using sardonic humor, partly not.
It is a fact that predatory sexual offenders cannot be effectively treated and will always remain a clear and present danger throughout their lifetimes regardless of treatment attempts or castration, by drugs or physically. It is a defect of the mind and they suffer too, no doubt, but certainly not in the same capacity as their victims.
Sacrifice for the greater good is, on occasion, the only safe and sane thing to do.

When one person can be responsible for countless traumas to innocents, well….you’ve lost your privilege to be part of a society and I think euthanasia is the most compassionate recourse.

Oh spare me the bullshit about “compassionate recourse” right after talking about burning folks alive. Be honest, it’s not about compassion, it’s about filling your psychological need for bloody vengeance.

If it’s about removing dangerous people from society then imprisonment works just as well

@Darth_Algar Over reacting a little?

I have zero need for vengeance.
I SAID it was partly sardonic humor, and I still stand by my sentiments of eliminating vicious predators from society.
Humanely yes, forget the dark sided humor.
Why should I pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to warehouse misery?

Spend my hard earned tax dollars on incarcerating irredeemable predators for 20, 30, 40, 50 years or more. I am talking the worst of the worst, obviously.
Yes, Ted Bundys and Osama Bin Ladens and child predators should be eliminated not stashed in prison forever after. Personally I have always been against the death penalty but I am having a change of heart lately.

Shift happens.

@Darth_Algar: “If it’s about removing dangerous people from society then imprisonment works just as well”

Well look at that. I actually agree with @Darth_Algar.

@Coloma – Why the change of heart regarding the death penalty? Has something happened regarding the criminal justice system that has filled you with confidence? Does the permanence of the death penalty combined with a very imperfect justice system leave you with any pause?

@Coloma

I fail to see the humor, dark or not, in statements like “X should be buried alive, gassed, whatever it takes”.

@hominid I’m still on the fence, not due to any personal experiences, just thinking that, as I said, the worst of the worst, terrorists, pedophiles, serial killers, have no chance of rehabilitation due to their issues and along with the misery of being incarcerated it is also a huge fiscal drain on the rest of us. Because I am not religious I see no real difference between putting down a vicious dog or a vicious human.

@Darth_Algar So you fail to pick up the sardonic humor, okay…but it was intended as such. If I must spell it out again, I am not advocating an eye for an eye or torturing people, but….removing vicious, mentally deranged people to protect the greater good does not make someone vengeful, just looking at things from a very practical standpoint.

@Coloma: “also a huge fiscal drain on the rest of us.”

The price we pay to house the most dangerous people and keep them from the rest of us is money well spent, in my opinion. There is no cost too high to ease my mind that if I were unjustly convicted of a crime, there would always be a chance that the truth would be revealed and I would be released. Death is kinda final.

@Coloma: “Because I am not religious I see no real difference between putting down a vicious dog or a vicious human.”

I don’t understand this statement. I’m not religious and don’t see the relevance to the latter part of your statement.

@Coloma

Again, prison accomplishes the removal of those people from society.

Oh man..what a can or worms I opened ey? lol

@hominid I agree that incarceration for some is the right thing, and certainly, for those that are wrongly convicted it would be a tragedy on top of a tragedy to euthanize them, but for the worst of the worst I think the millions of dollars spent could be put to much better use in programs for their victims and their families whose suffering endures forever in some cases. My comparing a vicious human to a vicious dog is just that a life form is a life form, I don’t believe mankind is any more or less special in a moral sense than any other life form. I don’t think “God” holds the moral monopoly and if we put down a vicious dog that rips the face off a two year old we should not feel any different about a vicious human who rips away someone else life, sense of trust and safety.

@Darth_Algar Yes it does, but it also costs millions and millions of dollars to warehouse these perpetrators and that money could be put to much better use for others IMO.
How did you feel about taking out Osama Bin Laden?
Should he have been allowed to live out his life imprisoned with the potential of still being able to cause harm through his affiliates?
To reiterate, I am only talking about the most dangerous of the dangerous, sociopaths, pedophiles, sadists etc. that have the potential of wracking up 100’s of victims in their sprees of depravity.

Homosexuality was considered a mental disorder. It was in the DSM. It was taken out in the mid 70’s.

It’s very different because homosexual sex and relationships among consenting adults is just that consenting. A child can’t consent to sex the way we define it in western society. Moreover, most children intuitively feel what they are doing is wrong. They usually don’t want to do it, but are coerced, they are doing it against their will. As adults they are negatively affected having had the experience. The negative results classify it as abnormal, as dysfunctional in society, and many other reasons to conclude it is not acceptable.

@Coloma: “but for the worst of the worst I think the millions of dollars spent could be put to much better use in programs for their victims and their families whose suffering endures forever in some cases.”

I suppose this is where we disagree. The federal government could tax 75% of my earnings just to pay for the incarceration and care of the dangerous elements rather than kill them, and that would be fine. I’m unconvinced that we’re paying too much for this. I’m paying for my future potential justice, and I can’t seem to put a price on this. When someone is put to death by the state, I am convinced that a crime is being committed – one that I am paying for. And I can see myself being put to death using my own tax dollars. If death weren’t final and we could just dig people up and say “sorry”, then I think we might have something to talk about. As it is, there really is no justification in the state choosing to kill people rather than incarcerate them indefinitely.

This same “it costs too much” is used quite often to justify cutting all kinds of services. Choosing to pay for services of the “needy” is at minimum choosing to pay insurance in case I need these services. I am a citizen who may need to be protected from the state some day. To say this costs “too much” is to puzzling. I can’t think of anything more important than insuring that I will not be put to death for a crime I did not commit.

@Coloma: “My comparing a vicious human to a vicious dog is just that a life form is a life form, I don’t believe mankind is any more or less special in a moral sense than any other life form. I don’t think “God” holds the moral monopoly and if we put down a vicious dog that rips the face off a two year old we should not feel any different about a vicious human who rips away someone else life, sense of trust and safety.”

What does that have to do with being religious? Religion has nothing to do with morality.

@hominid Well of course, not wishing to be put to death for a crime you didn’t commit is valid and reasonable. Again, I am only tossing the euthanasia bean into the pot for those that are truly guilty of atrocious acts beyond a shadow of a doubt.
I agree, religion has nothing to do with morality, but to the extremely religious it does.
I also agree that paying for services that I myself may need someday is in the best interest of society, however, the astronomical cost of housing the worst of violent criminals isn’t one of them. Well…probably best to move on now….I appreciate your input and respect your opinions.

@Coloma *“Yes it does, but it also costs millions and millions of dollars to warehouse these perpetrators and that money could be put to much better use for others IMO.
How did you feel about taking out Osama Bin Laden?
Should he have been allowed to live out his life imprisoned with the potential of still being able to cause harm through his affiliates?
To reiterate, I am only talking about the most dangerous of the dangerous, sociopaths, pedophiles, sadists etc. that have the potential of wracking up 100’s of victims in their sprees of depravity.”*

- The death penalty cost more than housing them for life does, actually. Beside, you can use the “why should my tax dollars ____” line for lots of things. Why should my tax dollars be used on the death penalty when I find it morally repugnant?

- If he could have been taken alive then, yes, we should have taken him alive, put him on trial and imprisoned him. Moot point though, there’s no way he was going to be taken alive.

- Potential? You want to execute people for potential crimes? Personally I prefer to prosecute people for crimes they actually commit, not crimes they could potentially commit.

@Coloma “Again, I am only tossing the euthanasia bean into the pot for those that are truly guilty of atrocious acts beyond a shadow of a doubt.”

Presumably anyone convicted is truly guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt.

@Darth_Algar I never said that, I said that keeping seriously dangerous people alive has the potential of creating more crimes of revenge, especially in the case of extremist terrorists.
I did not, in any way, say we should prosecute people for potential crimes.

@hominid Touche, but I think you know what I mean. Finding the DNA of a pedophile in the vagina of a 3 year old is kinda irrefutable evidence wouldn’t you say?

@Coloma your comments make me sick to my stomach.

^^^ Oh jeez you guys…lighten up! How many times do I have to repeat myself, I was being SARDONIC, not serious! Pffft!

There is a lot that could be said as to why, but sense it is hard for people ingrained in their thinking to go that deep or somehow find plausible logic hateful or insulting, I will simply answer your question with , because some people wanted it to, nothing more.

@Coloma You have a lot of compassion for non-human animals. Remember, we are not that different from a bonobo chimp. We act on subconscious urges, and whether we admit it or not: All of us have trouble denying our basic instincts. If you are born with instincts/urges whose realization- by definition – harms others, you are screwed.

@longgone You’re right, but, it is one thing to be screwed, and another to screw others because one cannot control their base animal compulsions.
I have plenty of compassion for humans, nobody would choose to be born a sociopath or pedophile, but humans can choose their behaviors while animals do not make conscious choices to do harm. If eliminating one defective human spares the suffering of dozens of innocent people, well…...

Having a hard time denying oneself of another slice of pie is not the same as having a hard time denying oneself a buffet of rape, murder and molestation.

^ “Humans can choose their behaviors while animals do not make conscious choices”

Ah. That’s where we disagree.

It’s due to political correctness.

Society has decided that it is not acceptable to comment on homosexuality unless your feelings about it are of a certain type.

This has not happened with paedophilia.

Yet.

Eventually one will not be allowed to say anything about anything.

@SecondHandStoke – I have come to believe that political correctness is a real threat to everything I feel is important. However, if political correctness has any relevance here, it would probably help to present something resembling evidence or an argument. I’m not sure how it’s relevant at all.

That said, what are your thoughts on @SavoirFaire‘s response above? Are you moved at all to wrestle with the concepts of harm and the definition of a “disorder”, which is arguably what this question is about?

It’s also odd to use an invitation to explain why pedophilia is considered a disorder but homosexuality isn’t by self-censoring yourself in hopes of claiming oppressed status rather than answer the question.

I agree with the over the top PC-ness as well. I am very PC 99% of the time, have no bias towards race, religion, sexual preferences, but cracking an un-PC ” get a rope” joke ( you know, the tag line for Pace Picante sauce ) well…so shoot me. lol

@longgone You are correct that sociopaths don’t have a choice in the way their brains are hardwired, they are born that way, the proverbial bad seed theory holds true there, while animals may correlate the action needed to attain a desired outcome they do not make the same sort of conscious decisions the way a would be violent criminal might. The dog may learn how to open the cupboard and steal a cookie but it isn’t lying awake at night plotting to steal. haha

^ Agree to disagree.

^^^ Agreed. :-)

“Political correctness” is nothing more than a meaningless buzzword for “whatever I disagree with”.

@Darth_Algar No, it is about tossing out archaic, degrading and inappropriate words & labels,
However, having a raucous sense of humor and referring to gassing someone is hardly the same as calling a mentally disabled person a retard or using racial or sexual slurs.

Observation It’s also odd to use an invitation to explain why pedophilia is considered a disorder but homosexuality isn’t by self-censoring yourself in hopes of claiming oppressed status rather than answer the question.
If one could answer a question honestly. This question answered honestly in any way other than glowing support for LGBT would be seen as insulting, bigoted, or hate speech putting the utterer at risk of being terminated without extreme prejudice.

@Hypocrisy_Central

Please, answer the question honestly.

Whether it be having a sexual preference for one’s own sex or individuals that are in modern times considered to be too young, homosexuality and paedophilia is about deeply engrained preferences. Nothing less, nothing more.

If we look at sexuality from the perspective of the Biological Imparitive, What we now consider to be paedophilia is far more valuable to the propagation of our species than homosexuality. Homosexuality is actually useless here.

However, since I personally feel that the human race is finally well established we can move from doing whatever is required to survive and begin exploiting natural processes for one’s pleasure.

This ranges from creating fine meals that are about far more than simply foraging to make it another day to having sex with one’s own gender purely personal gratification.

@Darth_Algar Please, answer the question honestly.
I was trying to find a sanitized way of saying it that even the thin-skinned could stomach but @SecondHandStoke did a masterfully adequate job in:

Whether it be having a sexual preference for one’s own sex or individuals that are in modern times considered to be too young, homosexuality and paedophilia is about deeply engrained preferences. Nothing less, nothing more.

If we look at sexuality from the perspective of the Biological Imparitive, What we now consider to be paedophilia is far more valuable to the propagation of our species than homosexuality. Homosexuality is actually useless here.

I am glad he posted it. Had I said it the nuggets of logic lodged in there would have been overshadowed by the mere fact I said it and it was not total or lauding for LGBT agenda. I hardly think how I could add more to that.

^^^ Yes, that may have been true 10,000 years ago but we no longer need to breed with young adolescent children to propagate the species. Modern day pedophilia is not only no longer necessary it is harmful and criminal and child sexual predators should be done away with, one way or another. Period.

Well @Darth_Algar, classic illustration to my point why you will never get an intelligent conversation of this subject. see above

@Hypocrisy_Central Why does the fact that your answer met with disagreement illustrate that we will never get intelligent conversation on the subject? I don’t think @Coloma‘s answer is unintelligent. Sure, she is set in her position. So are you. That doesn’t mean the two of you (or others) cannot exchange intelligent points about the issue.

And I see no reason you cannot discuss the question honestly. You don’t have to use slurs to be honest, so you’re not at risk of “termination.” It’s just a matter of phrasing.

@SavoirFaire Why does the fact that your answer met with disagreement illustrate that we will never get intelligent conversation on the subject?
First off, whether or not any intelligent, rational, civil, or whatever conversation you want to call it, has nothing to do with what response I may get, it is the way people choose to handle the subject.

Sure, she is set in her position. So are you.
Yeah, and many others as well have their positions. I attack it from logic within the construct of the question first, even if it is something that is not my cup of tea. I will debate of from logic, if it is something that is supposedly secular. To simply shoot something down, taking no account for nature, natural selection, biology, etc. just because it crosses one’s “ick factor” line, how can you have a rational discussion?

I could logically make Swiss cheese of it, using just logic, but people would then take it personal and run to you, or your team manufacturing what they think was a cut. One doesn’t have to use any of the cliché terms for bruised feelings to happen around here.

@Hypocrisy_Central You pointed to @Coloma‘s answer as a “classic illustration to my point why you will never get an intelligent conversation of this subject.” I am asking why you think that is. All she did was disagree with you, and so I do not see why you think her disagreement illustrates what you say it illustrates. She even took into account nature in her response.

You say you could logically make Swiss cheese of the opposing position, but so far you have not offered any evidence in favor of that. All we have gotten is assertions that you could. Such assertions don’t get us anywhere. Why not present an actual argument rather than an extended apologia for not answering the question?

@SavoirFaire You say you could logically make Swiss cheese of the opposing position, but so far you have not offered any evidence in favor of that.
Here is a nugget then, and mind you I am addressing your comment, not speaking to her.
Yes, that may have been true 10,000 years ago but we no longer need to breed with young adolescent children to propagate the species.
• Biologically (Sticking purely to science) adolescent humans can be very young adults or children who are almost adults, there is no blanket benchmark as all humans are different. When puberty hits during the span we call adolescence that is when adult life starts. Once biologically mature to be impregnated and to impregnate, the ”Good Ship Kiddieland” has sailed, (if you want to play just by the science).
• It was only a necessity to keep the species going. As if because it isn’t those the proclivity for it should somehow vanish, unless one has some problem with his/her mental faculties. If pedophilia had some use eons ago to keep the species going, to what benefit to keeping the species going that homosexuality provide? So, off pure logic, if pedophilia has no use and should not be done, that would logically go for homosexuality as it does nothing to propagate or sustain the human species.

Modern day pedophilia is not only no longer necessary it is harmful and criminal and child sexual predators should be done away with, one way or another.
• Falls or relies on the fallacy that the US has the right answer on the subject and the correct ”cut off” age as to denote when and how it should be done.
• Trying to pigeonhole the world to US standards. By that narrow standard people of Albania, Austria, Cambodia and Thailand at 14 yr., and Spain at 13 yr., are pervert leaning, or pedophile sympathizers; who here is going on the record to make that claim? Any takers?
• That would mean every minor, or those having not reached puberty who has had sex would be bumped in the head and damage goods, that would include celebrities of whom some are very sane and well-respected and members of the Collective here. That is not an all-inclusive statement but if the thought of someone 15 years of age actually wanting to be sexual with someone 30 years or older and enjoying it, not feeling victimized, and fully sane, not psychological impaired or immensely stupid would be incomprehensible to someone to which that breeches their ”ick factor”.
• In some places on this earth the same do away with them thought exist, what makes them more wrong?

Those are just a few nuggets that show unless you can stick to ”just the facts, Mack” it is less than possible to have an open conversation on the topic.

Oh goddammit people….

Pedophilia is the sexual attraction to pre-pubescent children, not post-pubescent, sexually developed teens. Stop confusing pedophilia and legal age of minority.

^^^ Ya think it wouldn’t be so hard to ass-ertain this fact huh? lol
Infact, if we want to talk nature, all species remove threats from their populations.
Threats to the health and well being of any population need to be removed.
To wander a bit afield here, look at all this bullshit with 80 yr. old Charles Manson and his lunatic 26 yr. old bride to be.

We have spent millions keeping this deviant alive for the last 45 years in prison and now the penal system is going to appoint a wedding consultant to help this sociopath plan his prison marriage. haha
He should have been eliminated decades ago.

@Darth_Algar Stop confusing pedophilia and legal age of minority.
Can’t stop what I never started. the confusion might be with another, but I am not confused