Re: Reply for Dissident

Would you like me to lead you by the hand into the nether regions? - you will have to keep your eyes shut tightly since viewing such material will make you go blind but when there I will tell you all about the nastiness. Will that do?

Not necessary. I have read enough history to know that Color Climax existed. That alone proves that KP has existed in some form at some point. My point is directed at the authorities making claims that nobody can verify. Although supposedly secular, that puts them in the same league with the religious authorities of earlier times.

How on earth do you expect the authorities to provide such evidence and not to possibly make it more attractive to those who might want to view this stuff?

Sorry, that's their problem, not mine.

The burden of proof is on the one making the claim.

By the way, never play poker, if you appreciate your money.

Since if you are not capable (some are, some aren't) of having an orgasm then sex will mean an entirely different thing to you than someone who can have an orgasm.

Fair enough.

Now, 10% of women should be made illegal, or maybe up to 50%
http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/001953.htm

Yes, of course every person is fully aware of what has made them the person that they currently are.

No, but we can't go through life assuming that everyone is acting or lying. Even if some are, the costs in assuming that everyone is far outweigh the benefit in catching the few who are.

Oh, the Dependency Theory!
What we simpletons like to say - no paedophiles, no abuse - except we do know that most of the abuse is never carried out by paedophiles. Without the attraction there might be less though.

The Dependency Theory is a Marxist-inspired, but not outright Marxist, theory of economic development. Dependencists believe that international trade only benefits the richer nations and constitutes a form of exploitation of the poorer nations. The ideal of dependencists would be to instead turn to producing everything at home, instead of mining or growing raw materials and commodities to sell abroad while buying finished goods from developed countries. It is considered refuted by the rise of the Asian Tigers.

The relevance is that dependencists start with the fact that trade has different benefits to each end of the trade, to claim that the benefits are inherently unequal, and so unequal that trade is inescapably a form of exploitation - a created dependency on trading with the richer nations.

To treat sexual contact between adults and children as an exchange where, always, one partner benefits greatly and the other doesn't, or minimally so, is a de-economized form of the Dependency Theory. (as in your next statement "the younger person begins to feel part of a relationship")

Children mature at different rates and two 8-year-olds might experience sexual feelings entirely differently, how is that semantics?

In that case, why ban also contact that is "age-appropriate"?

I don't know how many here fantasize about penetration, for instance; but I do know nobody here is so dumb as to think a girl is physically ready for it since birth, either.

Lastly, it might be that this attraction is faulty as I think or it may have some evolutionary benefit or any other origin and purpose so would you treat them all the same - this is good let's have more of this whatever it is?

I would ask the people involved how they want to be treated. To treat all the same is what I would least do.

Asking how to be treated includes both honoring the request to stop abuse if a child says they're abused (even if abuse is committed by parents or other authority figures); and honoring the request to allow a relationship to continue if a child says they feel right within it.

That requires no knowledge at all of why an adult is attracted to children or if the reason is genetic, environmental, psychological or even cultural.