Discussion About Pedophilia and Sex With Children
Just as in all relations between human beings, sex between adults
and children has its pleasant and unpleasant sides. But many of the
unpleasant sides exist only in the imagination and have no basic in
reality. Most objections against such relations are artificial and
hypocritical, establish ethical norms which will not be fulfilled by
nearly any other human interaction. It seems, only the absence of
open discussion in the classical media allows to consider them as
having some argumentative power.
- An assumed power differences is not
wrong in itself, only misuse of a power difference would be
wrong. Moreover this argument is not based on knowledge about the real power situation in pedophile
- That the child cannot give informed
consent is a justification to forbid dangerous or harmful things.
Thus, this argument is meaningless or based on the unproven assumption
of harm caused by volitional relations. It is remarkable that during
the persecution process nobody asks for even simple consent of the
- Possible harm is an unproven
assumption, every investigation which has tried to prove it has
failed. Only rape and sexual violence are harmful, as for children, as
- Premature sexualization is an
argument only for people who consider sex as something wrong.
- That sex with children is unnatural too.
Incorrect questions are another interesting point of many
discussions. The point of an incorrect question is that any direct
answer is incorrect too. The only correct way is to point out that it
is an incorrect question. Often a short comparison allows to make
this point. It is useful to collect standard answers for standard
- Can you prove that the relation
will not cause any harm for the child? (Can you prove it for playing
- If there is a remaining risc, who has
to decide if this risc is small enough?
The child, the adult, the parents, the authorities? (People who love
each other never will ask anybody else for permission. Thus, the only
question for parents and authorities is how to react if they observe a
- What do you think is an appropriate age for having sex? (It is
not my intention to create moral standards for other people.)
- Is it ok to suck an 8-year-old boy?
(My question is different: Is it ok to send somebody to jail because
he has sucked a consenting 13-year-old boy?)
See also an interview with
Comparisons are an interesting type of discussion. Human thinking
is often inconsistent, and the consideration of analogical situations
in other domains often shows this inconsistency. It allows to detect
errors in "logical conclusions", "rational rules" and other
statements: A correct statement remains correct if we replace the
objects by the analogical objects of the comparison.
Every comparison has bounds. Without considering these bounds, the
previous "replacement procedure" may lead to incorrect conclusions. It is
often very interesting to detect how far a comparison goes and to find the
correct analogon. Enjoy:
- Heterosexual relations show that power
differences are not a decisive argument - at least if your opponent is
not an extreme feminist.
- Homosexual relations shows that
the attitude of a democratic society is not decisive. Many arguments
(sick, pervers, not natural) have been used in the past against gays.
- masturbation shows the
possibility that scientists make claims about harm caused by harmless
- Skiing shows the hypocrisy of
arguments of type "if there is a small risc, it should be forbidden".
- Driving a car allows to clarify the
reasons for forbidding something to children (too complicate to learn,
- The same holds for drugs.
- Finkelhor has presented a nonsensical comparison with
"volitional slavery" which sometimes plays