3 ms·

We can defend pedophilia on Hacker News but such content wouldn't be welcome here. The article is about Facebook.

dragonwriter 9y ago
> We can defend pedophilia on Hacker News but such content wouldn't be welcome here. I'm not sure what relevance this has. > The article is about Facebook. Yes, it's specifically about a Facebook survey questions about how users would want Facebook to address adult solicitation of sexual images from post-pubescent minors, which the article incorrectly calls “pedophilia”. Soliciting such pictures is clearly illegal and widely and, IMO, rightly condemned. It is not, however, pedophilia, or in any way behavior associated with pedophilia. (Sexual attraction to prepubescent children is pedophilia, and is abnormal in and of itself; sexual attraction to post-pubescent children is not in and of itself abnormal, though an adult pursuing such an attraction is, for reasons of capacity for mature consent, viewed—quite correctly, IMO—as generally exploitive and worthy of condemnation in modern society.)
drharby 9y ago
He/she is being pedantic (as one should) to clarify the narrative. No harm there
- tropshop 9y ago
  > It is not, however, pedophilia, or in any way behavior associated with pedophilia Sorry that the general public does not follow the guidelines of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5). He/she is not just being pedantic, but also disingenuous by attempting to paint it as clear cut black and white. Hebephilia is absolutely closely related to pedophilia, and should not be tolerated any less.
  - dragonwriter 9y ago
    > Hebephilia is absolutely closely related to pedophilia, IIRC, that’s true in two senses: (1) Most of the normal age range for hebephilia (11-14) is within the age range used to define pedophilia for diagnostic purposes (under 13) and much of it is below the median age of puberty in either sex, so much hebephilia is pedophilia in either of itd strict senses (the “prepubescent” one or it's age-based operationalization in the DSM), and (2) the middle category in the three-way classification into pedophilia, hebephilia, and ephebophilia doesn't have a lot of evidentiary support for being a real distinct category separate from the ones on either side. > and should not be tolerated any less. I'm not making an argument about the degree to which adult male approaches to minors of different ages should be tolerated (whether or not they are backed by the kind of primary or exclusive attraction that would make any kind of paraphilia.) OTOH, I think there is plenty of evidence in law,nculture, and research that (1) the attractions are fundamentally different, and (2) the degree of social outrage directed at them is substantially different; for both reasons, calling a question about something that concerns conduct that is explicitly not indicative of pedophilia as being on about condoning pedophilia is an inappropriate use of emotionally loaded language that obscures rather than illuminates the issue.

> We can defend pedophilia on Hacker News but such content wouldn't be welcome here. I'm not sure what relevance this has. > The article is about Facebook. Yes, it's specifically about a Facebook survey questions about how users would want Facebook to address adult solicitation of sexual images from post-pubescent minors, which the article incorrectly calls “pedophilia”. Soliciting such pictures is clearly illegal and widely and, IMO, rightly condemned. It is not, however, pedophilia, or in any way behavior associated with pedophilia. (Sexual attraction to prepubescent children is pedophilia, and is abnormal in and of itself; sexual attraction to post-pubescent children is not in and of itself abnormal, though an adult pursuing such an attraction is, for reasons of capacity for mature consent, viewed—quite correctly, IMO—as generally exploitive and worthy of condemnation in modern society.)

drharby 9y ago

He/she is being pedantic (as one should) to clarify the narrative. No harm there

tropshop 9y ago
> It is not, however, pedophilia, or in any way behavior associated with pedophilia Sorry that the general public does not follow the guidelines of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5). He/she is not just being pedantic, but also disingenuous by attempting to paint it as clear cut black and white. Hebephilia is absolutely closely related to pedophilia, and should not be tolerated any less.
- dragonwriter 9y ago
  > Hebephilia is absolutely closely related to pedophilia, IIRC, that’s true in two senses: (1) Most of the normal age range for hebephilia (11-14) is within the age range used to define pedophilia for diagnostic purposes (under 13) and much of it is below the median age of puberty in either sex, so much hebephilia is pedophilia in either of itd strict senses (the “prepubescent” one or it's age-based operationalization in the DSM), and (2) the middle category in the three-way classification into pedophilia, hebephilia, and ephebophilia doesn't have a lot of evidentiary support for being a real distinct category separate from the ones on either side. > and should not be tolerated any less. I'm not making an argument about the degree to which adult male approaches to minors of different ages should be tolerated (whether or not they are backed by the kind of primary or exclusive attraction that would make any kind of paraphilia.) OTOH, I think there is plenty of evidence in law,nculture, and research that (1) the attractions are fundamentally different, and (2) the degree of social outrage directed at them is substantially different; for both reasons, calling a question about something that concerns conduct that is explicitly not indicative of pedophilia as being on about condoning pedophilia is an inappropriate use of emotionally loaded language that obscures rather than illuminates the issue.