# Lucid Dreaming > General Lucid Discussion >  >  Should pedophiles use lucid dreaming to live out their fantasies?

## Dr.Rockso

*What do you think? Should pedophiles use lucid dreaming to live out their fantasies?*

----------


## Reclypso

Are you asking for yourself? ;p

Well, if it's in their own mind and they don't post about their experiences on dream views then I wouldn't care. None of my business anyway.

----------


## Dannon Oneironaut

I don't understand the word "Should". Are you asking if it is harmful for them or others if they live out their fantasies in lucid dreaming?

----------


## Maria92

I don't see a problem with it. It's a victimless action. No harm, no foul.

----------


## Matt123

Sure, if you want. Its all in your mind as long as you do not relive the acts in real life.. though that's obvious.

----------


## slurry

If I had to choose with knowing pedos are carrying out their fantasies in real life vs. lucid dreaming, I'd much prefer to know that it's lucid dreaming. Either way it's creepy/messed up/etc., but at least in a dream it's not real/messing up real kids.

Really though, I think they shouldn't even do that. They might be weird, but they can choose to do other things with people their own age...no need to get kids involved.

----------


## DeletePlease

If they're simply dreaming, then sure. I'm sure most of us have dreamt of things far worse (whether intentionally or not) so I don't see why pedophilia should be seen as any different.

Also, that avatar is _sooo_ fucking creepy.

----------


## concusion

Lets hope that pedophile can't astral project!!! Hide the kids on the Astral Plane!!!!

----------


## Puffin

I say no. If you mean the actual definition of pedophile, it means they're already mentally unstable (there's obviously something different in the "wiring upstairs"), so it'd be dangerous to even let them try it in their dreams. They could get ideas, or it could make them want the real thing more.

----------


## JustDream

Not unless they're behind bars for life, then I could care less what they do in their dreams.  I just think it would tempt them to go for the real thing even more - as someone else mentioned.

However, I think they should try to be cured/healed of their illness and if that's not possible, as much as I hate to say it - they should be put to rest.  If that sounds harsh, just imagine how you would feel if one of them touched your kid.  

If I had super powers, my first priority in this world would be to seek & destroy people harming children!

----------


## dreamcatcher81

As sick as they are they do have the free will to do what they like in the astral dreamscape, and here too but in the larger scheme of things i hope they will eventually see how that kind of thinking is stagnating their growth as a Being. Negativity stunts all growth but we can all learn to be positive. :-) namaste.

----------


## Maria92

To the people saying it would "tempt" them more...it's just like the video-games-causing-violent-behavior debate. Complete and utter rubbish.

----------


## Hukif

Sure why not, it is either that or building stress over their condition. And we all know stress is bad, more chances of trying the real thing or searching for waking ways to get rid of it.

----------


## JustDream

> To the people saying it would "tempt" them more...it's just like the video-games-causing-violent-behavior debate. Complete and utter rubbish.



Regarding violence in video games, many of us have a natural inclination to want to run people over, gun them down etc., when we feel anger/stress/anxiety as a results of anger/emotion.  Video games are a very great way to satisfy those inner cravings for violence.  I've spent many hours killing and destroying property in GTA.

Being attracted to kids?  Not natural to begin with, so no I would not want to encourage that. A great example of this is pornography, which is also sexual in nature obviously.  Porn addicts always want the real thing eventually.

----------


## Hukif

Uh, it is natural, just not common. It also happens to hurt other people (children), and it doesn't means pedophiles will act on their instincts, just like people won't act on wanting to run over someone else, as you put it.

----------


## Maria92

> Being attracted to kids?  Not natural to begin with, so no I would not want to encourage that. A great example of this is pornography, which is also sexual in nature obviously.  Porn addicts always want the real thing eventually.



Try talking to an actual pedophile at some point. Most will tell you they tried to stop their feelings. Many went to therapy at some point. Few are ever able to change. It's a hardwired part of their brain that is entirely natural. Pornography, too, is perfectly natural. It's nice, and nearly all human brains find it arousing on some level. It's just how the brain works.

----------


## Solarflare

I dont see why not, no one is actually getting raped  ::D:

----------


## Puffin

> Try talking to an actual pedophile at some point. Most will tell you they tried to stop their feelings. Many went to therapy at some point. Few are ever able to change. It's a hardwired part of their brain that is entirely natural. Pornography, too, is perfectly natural. It's nice, and nearly all human brains find it arousing on some level. It's just how the brain works.



So given your post, I'm taking from it that the term "pedophile" should be defined. What about the people who don't want to stop it, or the people who really don't have a conscience, so to speak? I agree that it is a natural feeling for most people, but when one takes it far enough, as in abusing and hurting children just to satisfy these feelings... Would it still be right for them to go about their desired activities in a lucid dream?

----------


## Maria92

> So given your post, I'm taking from it that the term "pedophile" should be defined. What about the people who don't want to stop it, or the people who really don't have a conscience, so to speak? I agree that it is a natural feeling for most people, but when one takes it far enough, as in abusing and hurting children just to satisfy these feelings... Would it still be right for them to go about their desired activities in a lucid dream?



As long as they aren't hurting anyone, I don't care what they do in a dream. Even if they are hurting people, that matter is separate from what they do in dreams. Their dreams are their own business, and for the mentally sane, don't have any significant bearing on reality. Just like some people get off on the idea of raping someone, as long as they don't follow through, I don't care. Even if they do follow through, I don't give a damn what they dream about. The only actions that matter are the ones that happen here in reality. Dreams will not increase the likelihood of a pedophile or a rapist abusing someone. Killing off a thousand people in a dream isn't going to make anyone more violent. Same principle applies.

----------


## Thexie

I think I'm torn about this. I guess it depends when it comes to certain Pedophiles, but some may get an even greater urge from the dreams to do it in real life while some might actually feel better and never try it in real life or think about it as much.

----------


## Puffin

I seem to believe in this weird notion that peoples' thoughts are just as powerful as their actions. But that's a whole new can of worms, I suppose.

----------


## mooseantlers

Pedophillia in your dreams is fine. By the way pedophilia is natural just don't act on it. ALso most pedos don't act unless they are also psychopaths.

----------


## Maria92

> I seem to believe in this weird notion that peoples' thoughts are just as powerful as their actions. But that's a whole new can of worms, I suppose.



I disagree entirely. Just because you THINK about killing someone, doesn't mean you're actually going to follow through. If it did, we'd be murderers, all. There is a clear distinction between fantasy and reality, and as long as people are able to distinguish between the two and keep them separated, there is no harm done.

----------


## Dannon Oneironaut

What makes pedophilia wrong is not a moral issue, but the fact that it violates the freewill of a child who does not have the same power as an adult. I guess this might be considered morality, but I think that instinctuallly we know that violating freewill is wrong. What makes pedophilia natural is the same thing that makes any sexual orientation natural. Most of us are willing to accept that homosexuality is natural and is not a choice. But pedophilia? It is the same. People don't choose to be attracted to children, and they cannot change it. I have a theory that if a man is attracted to a boy it is like he is half-gay. He is attracted to males, but does not like the hairiness and pheremones of an adult male, but prefers a child who is weaker, less hairy, less smelly, like a woman. Still, it is wrong to act on it. I don't know why a man would be sexually attracted to a female child. Well, there are all sorts of attraction. Perhaps many people confuse different attractions as sexual attractions. It might be an attraction to innocence. Perhaps it can be a sickness in many situations. But mostly I think it is a natural desire that is taboo and harmful to children. By natural, I don't mean that everyone has this attraction, but rather that it is just what a certain percentage of the population is like, and would be like no matter what. 

I don't consider being sexually involved with a sexually mature minor pedophilia, but the law might think otherwise. 
So, go ahead and do it in your dreams, and don't feel guilty. But please don't act on it in waking life or else!

----------


## deepsleep

I think it is okay to an extent. As long as you don't allow urges to take over in waking life.

----------


## JustDream

> Try talking to an actual pedophile at some point. Most will tell you they tried to stop their feelings. Many went to therapy at some point. Few are ever able to change. It's a hardwired part of their brain that is entirely natural. Pornography, too, is perfectly natural. It's nice, and nearly all human brains find it arousing on some level. It's just how the brain works.



I agree that it's probably not something they can just shut off, easily anyways, and that what they do in their dreams is harmless in and of itself. I'm still unsure of whether it would fuel their inclination to act out in reality, I just don't think video-game violence is the best analogy.

However, I imagine you have zero proof of it being a hardwired part of the brain, that is "natural" but feel free to show me otherwise. I believe it's pretty inconclusive on both sides similar to shared dreaming is on this site.

I personally believe pedophilia involves the "rewiring" of the brain through some sort of childhood experience such as molestation, which if you've taken any psychology classes you may be familiar with reenactment and conditioning. In many documented cases, pedophiles themselves were molested as children, and develop the inclination themselves, which is where this rewiring has taken place (at least that's the theory I believe is most likely).

Regardless, I still don't think someone would be so understanding if one of their own kids were molested. That's where the violence from video games would probably manifest itself in reality  :wink2:

----------


## Jeff777

Touchy subject.  On one hand, I understand the "video game" argument.  But c'mon, this is lucid dreaming.. no video game on earth compares to the life-like _realness_ of what we experience.  On the other hand, I think maybe lucid dreaming could also be a way to satisfy pedophilia cravings BECAUSE lucid dreams are that intense.  Perhaps fucking kids in reality simulated dreams might just satisfy their appetite for children.  

Touchy subject is touchy.

----------


## Dannon Oneironaut

Has anyone ever noticed that a lot of pedophiles have their eyes too close together? Or one eye slightly crossed?

----------


## Emecom

I agree with JustDream. I don't think that it is a natural thing because in my opinion, something that occurs naturally would be because of instinct. Like heterosexuality is natural because we instinctively want to have sex with the opposite sex, so we can have kids and carry on our genes. I believe that it is caused by experiences that they have as children. I also feel that's how homosexuality occurs. But I don't necessarily think that it has to be because they themselves were molested, it could be tons of different experiences. While I don't believe its natural, I do believe that they really feel that way whether they like it or not. I definitely don't support pedophilia in real life, because like Donnon said, it takes away the child's free will. If they want to practice it in their dreams, then who are we to stop them, and how would we stop them anyways?

----------


## Dthoughts

I wonder if a pedophile would even choose to go after kids when they have a freedom of a dream. I think most pedophiles are just attracted to the helplesness of children and it's a much easier target to go after than a woman who knows how to take care of herself. Altho a lot of pedophiles are just ordinary men who could find a women willing to share a bed with them but perhaps these men only seek sex for personal satisfaction, i could see what might drive this person to like kids. 
I think if a pedophile met lucid dreaming he will find freedom to express his soul and learns to fantasize about other things than sex.

----------


## Maria92

> I agree with JustDream. I don't think that it is a natural thing because in my opinion, something that occurs naturally would be because of instinct. Like heterosexuality is natural because we instinctively want to have sex with the opposite sex, so we can have kids and carry on our genes. I believe that it is caused by experiences that they have as children. I also feel that's how homosexuality occurs. But I don't necessarily think that it has to be because they themselves were molested, it could be tons of different experiences. While I don't believe its natural, I do believe that they really feel that way whether they like it or not. I definitely don't support pedophilia in real life, because like Donnon said, it takes away the child's free will. If they want to practice it in their dreams, then who are we to stop them, and how would we stop them anyways?



As nature has demonstrated countless times before, it does not guarantee all members of a species will be born with the most advantageous traits. Indeed, many genetic diseases and conditions prevent people from ever reproducing. Nurture probably plays a key role in a number of cases, but I doubt it is the only factor in play.

----------


## Emecom

> As nature has demonstrated countless times before, it does not guarantee all members of a species will be born with the most advantageous traits. Indeed, many genetic diseases and conditions prevent people from ever reproducing. Nurture probably plays a key role in a number of cases, but I doubt it is the only factor in play.



Yeah I see your point. I didn't think about that, I agree that is probably the case in some people. But I still think that in the majority of people it comes from childhood experiences.

----------


## mooseantlers

Also you're a mass thread creator, you have never made a post unless its a new thread

----------


## Unelias

I do.

Wait, what?

Now seriously, while nobody can judge you by whatever you do in your dreams, there is always this little thing called yearning. Yes, it is real..ish. But it is still not real and I doubt anyone could settle only to that. It is just.. not human nature. Besides, what I have gathered the main reason pedophiles do what they do is not in fact purely sexual. It is about the feeling that you actually can control another human being to give you what you want. Most of the pedophiles do not, in fact, violently rape their victims. Rather they trick them to it.

----------


## mooseantlers

No I was talking to Dr Rockso

----------


## Empedocles

Pedophilia is something that disgusts me more than anything else, and I don't want it to exist _anywhere_, not even in the dreamworld.

Perhaps a better idea would be for a pedophile to use his lucid dreaming skill to talk to his subconscious in the form of a dream character, with the purpose of being cured of something as sick as pedophilic fantasies.

----------


## Jeff777

> Has anyone ever noticed that a lot of pedophiles have their eyes too close together? Or one eye slightly crossed?



That's sexist and racist.

----------


## Maria92

> Pedophilia is something that disgusts me more than anything else, and I don't want it to exist _anywhere_, not even in the dreamworld.
> 
> Perhaps a better idea would be for a pedophile to use his lucid dreaming skill to talk to his subconscious in the form of a dream character, with the purpose of being cured of something as sick as pedophilic fantasies.



The desire to police thoughts is a mark of fascism. I don't know about you, but I believe in freedom. If some of the top therapists in the world cannot "cure" pedophilia, what makes you think a person will exhibit the desire or ability to "cure" themselves?

----------


## ninja9578

No, they should talk to a shrink to help them, but it's better than raping little boys.

----------


## Empedocles

> The desire to police thoughts is a mark of fascism. I don't know about you, but I believe in freedom.



It is not a desire to police thought, but a desire not to encourage fantasies about pedophilia in any shape or form.





> If some of the top therapists in the world cannot "cure" pedophilia, what makes you think a person will exhibit the desire or ability to "cure" themselves?



You underestimate the power of lucid dreaming. Have you read "Exploring the World of Lucid dreaming" by Stephen LaBerge? Lucid dreaming is highly beneficial for a great number of things, not just simulating sex or flying around the city. People have actually been able to cure major phobias, anxiety disorders, and much more. In lucid dreaming you have direct contact with your subconscious. 

Instead of using lucid dreaming to find a 10 year old girl and abuse/rape her, I recommend talking to a dream character (your subconscious) about how to get rid of such desires.

----------


## Nephanim

Like many things, I don't think this is simply black and white. Some people with pedophilia might be able to use their dreams as a way to cope with desires that trouble them in waking life, while others might not be able to handle it. Just as I would be cautious about encouraging a violent person to wreak havoc and destruction in his lucid dreams, I'm cautious about encouraging a pedophile to entertain his fantasies in the same setting, but if he has the self control to approach it in a way that allows him to operate more efficiently in society, why not?

Who are we to say their preference is wrong? Don't misunderstand - taking advantage of children is almost universally accepted as harmful because of issues with consent and whatnot. Having said that, however, a child in a dream is not the same as a child in waking life. Consent is practically meaningless in most lucid dreams. Besides, the dreamer can just create a child with the mental capacity to make informed decisions in a sexual situation. As long as he approaches it responsibly, there's a lot of potential here for a person trying to resolve tendencies toward pedophilia. It's no more practical to restrict a person's behavior in dreams than it is to restrict thoughts.

Some of you have raised a good point: maybe dream work is an open avenue for altering one's sexual preference to better meet social standards. It would be great to see a formal study on that kind of treatment for pedophilia.

----------


## Maria92

> It is not a desire to police thought, but a desire not to encourage fantasies about pedophilia in any shape or form.



Right. Controlling what people think about. Controlling a perfectly harmless action. Never has there been a victim for someone thinking. 

Let's flip it around a minute. Pretend YOU'RE the minority, and you have people telling you not to have sexual fantasies about grown people of whatever sex you're attracted to, and that your attraction is just a disease that can be cured. 





> You underestimate the power of lucid dreaming. Have you read "Exploring the World of Lucid dreaming" by Stephen LaBerge? Lucid dreaming is highly beneficial for a great number of things, not just simulating sex or flying around the city. People have actually been able to cure major phobias, anxiety disorders, and much more. In lucid dreaming you have direct contact with your subconscious. 
> 
> Instead of using lucid dreaming to find a 10 year old girl and abuse/rape her, I recommend talking to a dream character (your subconscious) about how to get rid of such desires.



Riiiiiiight. Have read it, looked up the cases, and lucid dreaming was not the sole factor. It was a part of the treatment, not the cure. You sir, overestimate the power of dreams. And that's the nice thing about dreaming. It isn't abuse/rape, it's a loving relationship that cannot exist in reality. Find me the harm in having a fantasy, and you may yet make a point. Otherwise, you only show your desire to bend people to your arbitrary whims.

----------


## Unelias

> You underestimate the power of lucid dreaming. Have you read "Exploring the World of Lucid dreaming" by Stephen LaBerge? Lucid dreaming is highly beneficial for a great number of things, not just simulating sex or flying around the city. People have actually been able to cure major phobias, anxiety disorders, and much more. In lucid dreaming you have direct contact with your subconscious. 
> 
> Instead of using lucid dreaming to find a 10 year old girl and abuse/rape her, I recommend talking to a dream character (your subconscious) about how to get rid of such desires.



While dreams are a great way to communicate your subconcious, it has its restrictions. Human mind is a lot more complex than just to talk thinks out with your mind, moreso if your "problem" has anything to do with actual biological system ie. brains or neural strands. In psychology, it usually is more complex than just "bad childhood memories". Dreams might help you to understand why you are afraid of heights, but it is quite simple matter compared to more serious mental issues. Besides, subconcious comes more to play when you are not in the charge and then again it is pretty tricky to get yourself to ask questions because you aren't lucid. Lucid dreaming is a great tool for selfmending, but like most of the sex scenes in movies ( or porn to that matter), it is never actually that great the actors lead you to think it is.

About asking a dream character, how sure can you actually be that is the "right" answer. Try to do the door test and see what you find out. While lucid, imagine a door and invoke that beyond this door is the thing I crave most in the life. You might surprise yourself. I did.

----------


## Matt123

I don't think its fair to judge people who are mentally unstable (if I can say that in this situation), thoughts and feelings come naturally to people, look at fetishes - do you hate someone because because they like something out of the "norm". 

Saying "Ah that guy should be shot and killed because he is a pedophile" is not entirely fair, of course these people should seek therapy but at the same time you have to consider it from their view. 
Exactly like being homosexual (more or less), you don't choose it, it chooses you.

----------


## rynkrt3

Dreams are nothing more than vivid daydreams/thoughts.  I bet pedo's daydream and think about ramming kids all the time, so doing it in a dream is not much different.

----------


## rynkrt3

> I don't think its fair to judge people who are mentally unstable (if I can say that in this situation), thoughts and feelings come naturally to people, look at fetishes - do you hate someone because because they like something out of the "norm". 
> 
> Saying "Ah that guy should be shot and killed because he is a pedophile" is not entirely fair, of course these people should seek therapy but at the same time you have to consider it from their view. 
> Exactly like being homosexual (more or less), you don't choose it, it chooses you.



As nasty and freaky as pedo's are, Matt has a good point.

----------


## RooJ

In my opinion no, they shouldn't. In a pedophile such thoughts/dreams would trigger the brains reward system, strengthening neural pathways and reinforcing the thoughts and behaviour.

Im aware that sexual preference isnt really a choice, but encouraging sexual reinforcement is. This isnt about policing other peoples thoughts, its about taking control of your own. Its unhealthy to be fixated and fantasize about something you cant have at the best of times, but when the object of your fantasy is within your grasp everytime you leave the house, and mostly defenseless, its more important to get a handle on it.

Honestly I feel for pedophiles (not child abusers), because we dont tend to choose our sexuality and so it must be really hard for them, but everytime they obtain sexual gratification while thinking about children or pursue such thoughts they're reinforcing the problem.

----------


## JussiKala

Anyone else think why the OP is actually asking this?

----------


## RooJ

Because he's looking for peoples opinions on the subject?

----------


## Mathias

Yes, absolutely. It's the only outlet they have for such desires and as previously stated it's a natural condition so they can't do anything about their difference.  I don't think having the desires makes them a bad person. I'm just glad I didnt turn out like that. It's not like gay people have a choice either. At least that's what they report... So this the same type of case. Would you knock a gay guy for having a gay lucid sex dream? I sure as hell wouldn't. If yo can't fulfill your wishes in real life, let them be satisfied in your dreams.

----------


## apsinvo

I vote no. Can we agree that 'pedophilia' is 'negative craving/addictive behavior'? It shouldn't be lived out in the dream, or should I say 'indulged' in the dream - this will only increase desensitization and further unconscious cravings for gratification. The question is the same as asking, is it OK for a pedophile to sit at home watching 2 hours of kiddie porn every night, in perfect 3d all-immersing-experience home cinema, as long as he's not out on the street affecting kids? No, because the next morning, pedophilia will seem 'a bit less wrong' to him. If a pedophile wants to use LD to live out certain experiences, perhaps examining the cravings, re-living past experiences, etc, in a safe environment and to find liberation - that's a fantastic idea - I wish him every success and happiness. Getting stuck in LDs with some kind of addition is just as bad in LDs as it is in RL - arguably worse, and will lead you further down the path of greed and misery. There's never enough. The only option is to use dreaming as a way up and out, not down!

I've had many absolutely amazing, 'wow' lucid dreams. The first time I flew and had good control over it for example was incredible - I also had perfect memory of the entire 2 minute LD. As I walked through the mall the next day, I kept smiling with ever such a strong urge to try and push up with my left foot and fly as I had in the LD - fortunately I didn't try! I even felt completely different, floaty and light, and have believed that it was entirely possible to just fly there and then. Does anyone really want a guy walking through the mall who just spent an hour early that morning in a dream molesting children? I can only imagine the dreamer's uncontrollable urge to continue what had been absolutely acceptable and without any consequence in the dream.

----------


## Maria92

> I vote no. Can we agree that 'pedophilia' is 'negative craving/addictive behavior'?



Nope. It's an orientation. 





> It shouldn't be lived out in the dream, or should I say 'indulged' in the dream - this will only increase desensitization and further unconscious cravings for gratification.



Just like playing violent video games desensitizes people to real violence and increases the unconscious craving for bloodlust? Oh my mistake, that doesn't actually happen. 





> The question is the same as asking, is it OK for a pedophile to sit at home watching 2 hours of kiddie porn every night, in perfect 3d all-immersing-experience home cinema, as long as he's not out on the street affecting kids?



If it's real kiddie porn, then no. Kids were harmed in the making of it. But if we're talking like cartoons or computer animations that don't use kids at all, I don't have a problem with that. 





> No, because the next morning, pedophilia will seem 'a bit less wrong' to him.



Just like how watching a violent movie makes you want to murder all your neighbors. Oh wait, that doesn't happen either. 





> Getting stuck in LDs with some kind of addition is just as bad in LDs as it is in RL - arguably worse, and will lead you further down the path of greed and misery. There's never enough. The only option is to use dreaming as a way up and out, not down!



This argument is built on flawed premises and bad reasoning. Should you ban all vices in dreams? How about the person who tries some dream drugs because they don't want to fuck up their bodies with the real deal but still want to trip out? Or how about a person who enjoys blackjack but not going broke? Dreams are a safe environment _detached from reality_ where a person is free to indulge themselves however they see fit. It does no harm to dream of murdering or raping or gambling or whatever. It's a dream. Any  sane person with the ability to distinguish fantasy from reality will be unaffected by them. At most, it'll just encourage them to dream more. It's quite obviously the path of least resistance, and a seasoned dreamer can achieve dreams that meet or exceed reality. 





> I've had many absolutely amazing, 'wow' lucid dreams. The first time I flew and had good control over it for example was incredible - I also had perfect memory of the entire 2 minute LD. As I walked through the mall the next day, I kept smiling with ever such a strong urge to try and push up with my left foot and fly as I had in the LD - fortunately I didn't try! I even felt completely different, floaty and light, and have believed that it was entirely possible to just fly there and then. Does anyone really want a guy walking through the mall who just spent an hour early that morning in a dream molesting children? I can only imagine the dreamer's uncontrollable urge to continue what had been absolutely acceptable and without any consequence in the dream.



The last vivid dream I had consisted of slaughtering a couple thousand people with a chain saw. I had no urge whatsoever to go to the local mall and begin decapitating people. Know why? Because it was a fucking dream! How does this compare? So YOU felt a slight urge to begin flying. So what? That automatically means any pedophile who dreams of shagging kids will instantly become a serial child molester? No. It's fucking ridiculous.

----------


## MindGames

I agree with Mario92 on this one, on the condition that the pedophile is mentally stable. This goes for any type of fantasy that would be considered immoral in real life.

----------


## RooJ

> Just like how watching a violent movie makes you want to murder all your neighbors. Oh wait, that doesn't happen either.



That analogy might work if it wasn't for the fact that most people who play violent video games dont do it to satisfy a desire to kill people. Infact most people who play violent video games dont have a desire to kill at all.

I guess you could ask if its a good idea for someone, fascinated with killing and with a suppressed desire to kill people, to indulge in this fantasy by watching snuff movies and slaughtering people in their dreams? Maybe it wont push them into committing a crime but id argue that its most probably unhealthy for them.

----------


## MindGames

> I guess you could ask if its a good idea for someone, fascinated with killing and with a suppressed desire to kill people, to indulge in this fantasy by watching snuff movies and slaughtering people in their dreams? Maybe it wont push them into committing a crime but id argue that its most probably unhealthy for them.



I'd argue that indulging in this type of fantasy in lucid dreams would help to alleviate the suppressed desire in the individual. If they could do this in their dreams, they wouldn't have to suppress the desire anymore, and would therefore be more in control of it. So the individual might be able to benefit from killing people in lucid dreams. However of course this probably wouldn't hold true for people with psychosis.

----------


## RooJ

> I'd argue that indulging in this type of fantasy in lucid dreams would help to alleviate the suppressed desire in the individual.



Having an outlet for the desire wont necessarily alleviate it. I dont think Indulging in the fantasy on any level is a good idea in the case of pedophilia.

----------


## MindGames

I probably could have worded that better. What I meant was that having an outlet would help the individual cope in terms of having to suppress the desire. If they are able to fulfill their desires in their lucid dreams, then they wouldn't have as much of a problem of suppressing the actions in real life.

----------


## Empedocles

> Right. Controlling what people think about. Controlling a perfectly harmless action. Never has there been a victim for someone thinking.



It is harmless to the point until it starts feeding your desires to try it out in real life. Thinking itself is harmless, but thinking can lead to wishing, and wishing can lead to plotting.





> Let's flip it around a minute. Pretend YOU'RE the minority, and you have people telling you not to have sexual fantasies about grown people of whatever sex you're attracted to, and that your attraction is just a disease that can be cured.



I have nothing against homosexuals (for example) who have intercourse with consenting adults, as long as they do not try to force their lifestyle onto others. Pedophiles however, are not in the same category as homosexuals.





> Riiiiiiight. Have read it, looked up the cases, and lucid dreaming was not the sole factor. It was a part of the treatment, not the cure. You sir, overestimate the power of dreams.



You can "riiiight" all you want, but you do not know what you are talking about. You are underestimating the power of LUCID dreaming, not regular dreaming. People have been able to cure phobias, as I am one of those people who have done it. No other treatment except "intelligent" lucid dreaming.





> And that's the nice thing about dreaming. It isn't abuse/rape, it's a loving relationship that cannot exist in reality. Find me the harm in having a fantasy, and you may yet make a point. Otherwise, you only show your desire to bend people to your arbitrary whims.



I never said there is harm in having a fantasy, but the question is, who guarantees it will only remain a fantasy? Do you really think all the pedophiles in the world just started to abuse children without having any fantasies prior to these acts? What happens if the "lucid pedophile" starts getting more and more into it, and wishing every night to rape a kid in his lucid dream? He forms an addiction, and it's "OK" as long as it's a fantasy, but what if he starts having a dry spell with lucid dreams? What if he starts having insomnia and gets cut off from his pedo-dream-world for a longer period? 

If he is mentally stable nothing bad should happen, but what if he isn't?

I am "bending people to my arbitrary whims" because I do not encourage pedophilic fantasies? Perhaps I am having this discussion right now with someone who has such fantasies themselves. Answer this question please:

Would you let a man who on regular basis has intercourse with children in his dreams babysit your kid?

----------


## RooJ

> I probably could have worded that better. What I meant was that having an outlet would help the individual cope in terms of having to suppress the desire. If they are able to fulfill their desires in their lucid dreams, then they wouldn't have as much of a problem of suppressing the actions in real life.




I understand your argument but my current view is that having sex with children in lucid dreams would be a means of indulging in the fantasy, keeping the mind focussed on it. Pleasure rewards obtained while thinking about sex with children would act to condition the brain. It can only reinforce the view of children being a means for sexual satisfaction.

As has been mentioned, in many cases of child molestation that Ive heard of (and probably most) a pedophile would have other means of satisfying the urge in the beginning, be it child porn or fantasy etc. The problem is that you're actively encouraging the brain to trigger arousal around kids by fantasizing like that. Why do that to yourself? Now next time you're around a child at bath time you have to work twice as hard to fight arousal because your brain automatically assumes it's getting some action.

Pedophiles should work towards tackling their desires, not finding a way to indulge in them.

----------


## Maria92

> It is harmless to the point until it starts feeding your desires to try it out in real life. Thinking itself is harmless, but thinking can lead to wishing, and wishing can lead to plotting.



Ah, been a while since I've seen a good old slippery slope fallacy. In short, you're wrong. 





> I have nothing against homosexuals (for example) who have intercourse with consenting adults, as long as they do not try to force their lifestyle onto others. Pedophiles however, are not in the same category as homosexuals.



I'm talking about imagining that the world is composed mainly of pedophiles, and you're in the minority. 





> You can "riiiight" all you want, but you do not know what you are talking about. You are underestimating the power of LUCID dreaming, not regular dreaming. People have been able to cure phobias, as I am one of those people who have done it. No other treatment except "intelligent" lucid dreaming.



Look up the cases, mate. 





> I never said there is harm in having a fantasy, but the question is, who guarantees it will only remain a fantasy? Do you really think all the pedophiles in the world just started to abuse children without having any fantasies prior to these acts? What happens if the "lucid pedophile" starts getting more and more into it, and wishing every night to rape a kid in his lucid dream? He forms an addiction, and it's "OK" as long as it's a fantasy, but what if he starts having a dry spell with lucid dreams? What if he starts having insomnia and gets cut off from his pedo-dream-world for a longer period?



More slippery slope. 

Alright, I know more than a few people who do nothing in dreams but kill and fight and slaughter the masses. In waking life, they are healthy, normal individuals who express no desire to _actually kill people._ There is a massive jump from wanting to do something in an environment virtually free of consequences to doing something in an environment constructed entirely of consequences. Are the people who are "addicted" to killing in dreams going to suddenly become murderers in real life if cut off? Hell no. It's a stupid argument that falls apart if examined for more than three seconds. 





> If he is mentally stable nothing bad should happen, but what if he isn't?



Then he's in the same boat as everyone else unable to distinguish fantasy from reality: they are a threat to public safety and should be institutionalized along with all the other mentally insane. You can't argue here that dreaming plays a greater role in insane pedophiles than it does insane rapists or serial killers. It's an entirely different class of people. 





> I am "bending people to my arbitrary whims" because I do not encourage pedophilic fantasies? Perhaps I am having this discussion right now with someone who has such fantasies themselves. Answer this question please:



I'm sick of seeing pedos come under constant fire from the massively ignorant. I know several, and they are decent people. They wouldn't even think about hurting a kid in real life. I also know a few people into rape play, BDSM, incest, and some other interesting things that don't get me off, and I will defend their rights to dream as they wish to the hilt. 





> Would you let a man who on regular basis has intercourse with children in his dreams babysit your kid?



If he is not a sex offender, sure. I wouldn't even know what his dreams are. It's quite frankly none of my goddamn business.

----------


## WhatIsX

> Nope. It's an orientation. 
> 
> 
> 
> Just like playing violent video games desensitizes people to real violence and increases the unconscious craving for bloodlust? Oh my mistake, that doesn't actually happen. 
> 
> 
> 
> If it's real kiddie porn, then no. Kids were harmed in the making of it. But if we're talking like cartoons or computer animations that don't use kids at all, I don't have a problem with that. 
> ...



 Fully agree. Well said.

----------


## Raphael

Ideally, people _should_ be able to dream about whatever the hell they want. Thankfully we live in a society where there aren't any "dream police." If dreaming about something leads to enacting it in real life, as Jakob suggested, then I'm in trouble. I've done stuff much worse than mere pedophilia, in my dreams. In fact there's a theory that people live out their most primal and hidden desires in dreams, and the reason they're so hard to recall is because remembering the heinous things would traumatize the person experiencing them. 

I actually encourage pedos to fulfill their fantasies in the comfort and security of their own dreams, it's really none of my business. I'm sure pedos have the ability to restrain themselves just like any ordinary person. I'm sure all of us have had illegal sexual desires at some point in our lives that we never acted upon. 






> I vote no. Can we agree that 'pedophilia' is 'negative craving/addictive behavior'?







> Nope. It's an orientation.



This is a whole debate in itself, I don't think it can be summed up in a blunt statement like that. Although I do agree with most everything else you said.

----------


## Empedocles

> Ah, been a while since I've seen a good old slippery slope fallacy. In short, you're wrong.



Nonsense. As I said, I have nothing about fantasies as long they remain fantasies. But with unstable/disturbed/aggressive individuals I don't see how feeding them with real-life "simulations" of having sex with children can lead to anything other than feeding the desires.





> I'm talking about imagining that the world is composed mainly of pedophiles, and you're in the minority.



You wanted to portray me as intolerant person, and I gave you homosexuality as a perfect example that I am completely tolerant to people with other sexual orientations. Pedophilia on the other hand is something else, and you simply cannot put the two in the same basket, claiming it is "just an orientation." *According to Mayo Clinic, 95% of child sexual abuse incidents are commited by those who meet the diagnostic criteria for pedophilia. These victims are age 12 and younger.* You my friend, do not know what you are talking about.





> Look up the cases, mate.



Why? I have cured a major phobia through lucid dreaming, and this is evidence enough for me that it is completely possible.





> More slippery slope. 
> 
> Alright, I know more than a few people who do nothing in dreams but kill and fight and slaughter the masses. In waking life, they are healthy, normal individuals who express no desire to _actually kill people._ There is a massive jump from wanting to do something in an environment virtually free of consequences to doing something in an environment constructed entirely of consequences. Are the people who are "addicted" to killing in dreams going to suddenly become murderers in real life if cut off? Hell no. It's a stupid argument that falls apart if examined for more than three seconds.



Ah, but shapeshifting into an alien and shooting people up in dreams is not the same as being a pedophile - a person with a strong desire to have sex with children. This is a dangerous deviance, and not just an orientation as you so lightly put it. If what I cited above (that 95% of sexual abuse incidents are by pedophiles) means nothing to you, then I cannot help you.





> Then he's in the same boat as everyone else unable to distinguish fantasy from reality: they are a threat to public safety and should be institutionalized along with all the other mentally insane. You can't argue here that dreaming plays a greater role in insane pedophiles than it does insane rapists or serial killers. It's an entirely different class of people.



Nonsense. It is not an entirely different class of people because of what I cited above. It is just one example among many, and here is another one for you: 

*Pedophilic child molesters commit ten times more sexual acts against children than non-pedophilic child molesters. (Mayo Clinic)*





> I'm sick of seeing pedos come under constant fire from the massively ignorant. I know several, and they are decent people. They wouldn't even think about hurting a kid in real life.



Please don't twist what I said. Among pedophiles are also decent people, and I have never denied that. They control their desires as much as they can, and would never attempt to abuse a child. The question is are the majority of pedophiles decent people, statistically speaking? The answer is no, according to hundreds of studies and statistics.





> I also know a few people into rape play, BDSM, incest, and some other interesting things that don't get me off, and I will defend their rights to dream as they wish to the hilt.



Complete sidestep.

Rape *play* - Harmless, between two consenting adults.
BDSM - Harmless as well.
Incest - I don't encourage it, but if people want to do it, it's ok, unless they force their family members to have sex with them.





> If he is not a sex offender, sure.



Oh please. You have just lost all credibility you may have had.





> I wouldn't even know what his dreams are. It's quite frankly none of my goddamn business.



But the question is if you knew what his dreams are, would you allow it? You are full of it.

----------


## Marm

Why would you even think about this?

----------


## Empedocles

> If dreaming about something leads to enacting it in real life, as Jakob suggested, then I'm in trouble. I've done stuff much worse than mere pedophilia, in my dreams.



You seem to have misunderstood me. If I have a desire to rob a bank in my dream, then I have a desire to rob a bank in my dream - period. NOT in real life.

Pedophiles do not just have a desire to have sex with children in a dream. They have a desire to have sex with children in reality, and statistically they are much more likely than others to commit a sexual offense. Please read what I cited in my last post above.

There is a big difference. Some of them are decent individuals who control themselves, but the majority are not, and despire what *Mario92* says, I very much doubt he would leave his child alone with a pedophile. If he really would, then he is either a complete idiot, or a pedophile himself. I don't see another explanation.

----------


## Raphael

These two quotes conflict with each other:




> You seem to have misunderstood me. If I have a desire to rob a bank in my dream, then I have a desire to rob a bank in my dream - period. NOT in real life.







> It is harmless to the point until it starts feeding your desires to try it out in real life. Thinking itself is harmless, but thinking can lead to wishing, and wishing can lead to plotting.



If you are going by the logic that dream desires are independent from real life desires, then be consistent. Don't turn around and say pedophiles are on a separate plane from bank robbers. If you have the desire to rob a bank in real life, are you going to wake up and start planning a bank robbery? You will say, "of course not, it's only a dream desire." But then I can say the same thing about pedophile's dream desires. You're saying that by having lucid dreams about pedophilia, the pedo's desire is going to become even more intense to a point where he/she will start plotting. That is speculation based on zero facts. You cannot prove statistically that pedophiles who lucid dream about pedophilia are more likely to act upon these desires in real life, and that's what this discussion is really about.

----------


## Maria92

> Nonsense. As I said, I have nothing about fantasies as long they remain fantasies. But with unstable/disturbed/aggressive individuals I don't see how feeding them with real-life "simulations" of having sex with children can lead to anything other than feeding the desires.



so, all pedophiles are automatically unstable/aggressive/disturbed? I was under the impression they had a different sexual attraction than you. 





> You wanted to portray me as intolerant person, and I gave you homosexuality as a perfect example that I am completely tolerant to people with other sexual orientations. Pedophilia on the other hand is something else, and you simply cannot put the two in the same basket, claiming it is "just an orientation." *According to Mayo Clinic, 95% of child sexual abuse incidents are commited by those who meet the diagnostic criteria for pedophilia. These victims are age 12 and younger.* You my friend, do not know what you are talking about.



That's nice. Now how about a statistic that compares the number of pedophiles who do nothing to the number of pedos who actually molest children. I'm sure you'll find the results surprising. 





> Why? I have cured a major phobia through lucid dreaming, and this is evidence enough for me that it is completely possible.



Oh do tell. What did you cure yourself of? How bad was it to start with? How bad is it to this day? 





> Ah, but shapeshifting into an alien and shooting people up in dreams is not the same as being a pedophile - a person with a strong desire to have sex with children. This is a dangerous deviance, and not just an orientation as you so lightly put it. If what I cited above (that 95% of sexual abuse incidents are by pedophiles) means nothing to you, then I cannot help you.



You seem to be confusing your statistics. If there are, for the sake of argument, 1 million pedos in America right now, and 950 molest children out of 1000 cases per year (for the sake of argument), you can't say that all pedos are bad or deviants. Your statistic means absolutely nothing. At that rate, only .095% of pedophiles are a problem. 





> Nonsense. It is not an entirely different class of people because of what I cited above. It is just one example among many, and here is another one for you:



Insane people are unable to distinguish fantasy from reality. They are unable to determine the consequences of their actions. The vast majority of pedophiles are not insane. 





> *Pedophilic child molesters commit ten times more sexual acts against children than non-pedophilic child molesters. (Mayo Clinic)*



Oh you mean that .095% figure. So they molest children, eh? Wow, didn't see that one coming. How about the other 99.905% of the pedophile population that does _absolutely nothing wrong?_





> Please don't twist what I said. Among pedophiles are also decent people, and I have never denied that. They control their desires as much as they can, and would never attempt to abuse a child. The question is are the majority of pedophiles decent people, statistically speaking? The answer is no, according to hundreds of studies and statistics.



Please take a statistics class before drawing such terribly wrong conclusions. 





> Complete sidestep.
> 
> Rape *play* - Harmless, between two consenting adults.
> BDSM - Harmless as well.
> Incest - I don't encourage it, but if people want to do it, it's ok, unless they force their family members to have sex with them.



Your argument is positioned on what appears to be two main factors:
1. the fallacious notion that having pedophilic dreams will cause them to happen in reality
2. that it's icky. 

So now, if we can strike #2 off the list, you've still got the fallacious notion that dreaming of it causes it to happen. Now, I honestly have a desire to rob a bank, both in reality and in the dream land. But no matter how much I dream of it, I won't rob a real bank. Why? Because doing so has consequences. It would be far from my best interest to actually engage in that activity. No matter how consumed I am with the notion, no matter how well I plan it out, I'm not going to act. Spending the rest of my life in jail is not worth the 5-minute thrill of robbing a bank. I know this, and every sane person knows this. 





> Oh please. You have just lost all credibility you may have had.



Ooh, nice ad hoc.





> But the question is if you knew what his dreams are, would you allow it? You are full of it.



Let's assume he's a professional babysitter. Been doing this for ages. No problems whatsoever. Why would he suddenly rape my child? He's got a job he can enjoy without going to prison, a steady income, and he's not _a complete fucking looney._ As far as I'm concerned, he's harmless.

----------


## Empedocles

> so, all pedophiles are automatically unstable/aggressive/disturbed?



All of them are disturbed, obviously, or else they wouldn't want to have sex with kids.  :Oh noes:  About the other characteristics, here is an example: Travelling to Thailand to have sex with a few month old baby (read about it) is an aggressive/disturbing/unstable/insane/disgusting act. Whoever disagrees with this needs to get his head checked.





> I was under the impression they had a different sexual attraction than you.



They do..... but they also have a very strong desire to carry it out.

*“Research shows pedophiles have a high rate of repeat offenses – with study statistics varying between 65 and 80 percent.” http://www.summitdaily.com/apps/pbcs...=2003305080103*





> That's nice. Now how about a statistic that compares the number of pedophiles who do nothing to the number of pedos who actually molest children. I'm sure you'll find the results surprising.



The information I have cited is enough evidence that most pedophiles are individuals that are not to be trusted, and that they should be treated as dangerous people. Here is another gem for you:

*“The average pedophile will victimize 244 children in their lifetime, according to the Massachusetts Children’s Trust Fund, a child advocacy group working to prevent child abuse and neglect.” http://www.aninchfrommurder.com/blog...ge_follows.php*





> Oh do tell. What did you cure yourself of? How bad was it to start with? How bad is it to this day?



You will dismiss whatever I tell you, so my answer to that particular question is useless in this discussion.





> You seem to be confusing your statistics. If there are, for the sake of argument, 1 million pedos in America right now, and 950 molest children out of 1000 cases per year (for the sake of argument), you can't say that all pedos are bad or deviants. Your statistic means absolutely nothing. At that rate, only .095% of pedophiles are a problem.



LOL, show me REAL statistics please, as I have shown you. Words mean nothing. I say pedophiles are dangerous, and I backed it up. Now prove me wrong.

And it's funny how you automatically assume that every molestation that occurs is documented. There are children keep these things in themselves for many years, sometimes never speaking out about it. Some children tell someone immediately, and others wait many years until they speak out. I have shown enough evidence that they are not to be trusted. You have shown absolutely nothing except a strong desire to defend them.

You have no case.





> Insane people are unable to distinguish fantasy from reality. They are unable to determine the consequences of their actions. The vast majority of pedophiles are not insane.



Tell that to a father's face who's little daughter was raped by a pedo. I'd pay to see that.  ::D: 





> Oh you mean that .095% figure. So they molest children, eh? Wow, didn't see that one coming. How about the other 99.905% of the pedophile population that does _absolutely nothing wrong?_
> 
> Please take a statistics class before drawing such terribly wrong conclusions.



What in the world are you babbling about? Statistics show that they are not to be trusted.





> Your argument is positioned on what appears to be two main factors:
> 1. the fallacious notion that having pedophilic dreams will cause them to happen in reality
> 2. that it's icky.
> 
> So now, if we can strike #2 off the list, you've still got the fallacious notion that dreaming of it causes it to happen. Now, I honestly have a desire to rob a bank, both in reality and in the dream land. But no matter how much I dream of it, I won't rob a real bank. Why? Because doing so has consequences. It would be far from my best interest to actually engage in that activity. No matter how consumed I am with the notion, no matter how well I plan it out, I'm not going to act. Spending the rest of my life in jail is not worth the 5-minute thrill of robbing a bank. I know this, and every sane person knows this.



Once you start off wrong, nothing right will follow. My argument was to use lucid dreaming as a treatment for pedophilia instead of using lucid dreaming to feed pedophilic fantasies with more pedophilic fantasies. 

*A 1994 National Institute of Health survey of 453 pedophiles, conducted by Dr. Gene Abel, showed these criminals were collectively responsible for the molestation of over 67,000 children. That’s an average of 148 children per individual pedophile.*





> Ooh, nice ad hoc.



It was just a conclusion.





> Let's assume he's a professional babysitter. Been doing this for ages. No problems whatsoever. Why would he suddenly rape my child? He's got a job he can enjoy without going to prison, a steady income, and he's not _a complete fucking looney._ As far as I'm concerned, he's harmless.



Don't dance around the question PLEASE.  ::roll::  You "assume" way too much here. You don't know if he molested anyone or not. Maybe he did and no one spoke out, or maybe people spoke out and you didn't find out about it. Simple scenario:

You know he's a babysitter.
You know he's a pedophile. 
You know he dreams about having sex with children.

And you would let him babysit your kid?

It seems the image in your signature tells me why you are so devoted to defending pedophiles.  ::lol::

----------


## Empedocles

> These two quotes conflict with each other:
> 
> 
> If you are going by the logic that dream desires are independent from real life desires, then be consistent. Don't turn around and say pedophiles are on a separate plane from bank robbers. If you have the desire to rob a bank in real life, are you going to wake up and start planning a bank robbery? You will say, "of course not, it's only a dream desire." But then I can say the same thing about pedophile's dream desires. You're saying that by having lucid dreams about pedophilia, the pedo's desire is going to become even more intense to a point where he/she will start plotting. That is speculation based on zero facts. You cannot prove statistically that pedophiles who lucid dream about pedophilia are more likely to act upon these desires in real life, and that's what this discussion is really about.



Nonsense. Pedophilia is a need-driven behavior that produces very strong desires. Desire to have sexual intercourse is one of the most powerful desires in human beings. Now imagine how a pedophile feels when he is not attracted to adults, but to kids. He still wants to have sex as much as others do, but the law does not allow him to have sex with children. 

He can either:

1.) fantasize about it without ever carrying it out in his lifetime
2.) actually carry it out

Now, using logic, critical thinking, and looking at the world we live in, how likely is #1?  ::roll::

----------


## Betropper

It is totally fine for them to do so. I have a -phillia of my own that I hate myself for liking. (It's very weird, but not as weird as pedophillia.) that I sometimes live out in lucid dreaming. I am not hurting anyone nor my morality, in fact it is the main reason I started lucid dreaming in the first place. It helps me release my feelings and forget about it during the day. Pedophiles are usually no different than the rest of us and need the ability to satisfy their cravings or they might actually do it in real life.

----------


## Jay12341235

it's already considered to be okay in real life so why not?

----------


## Maria92

> All of them are disturbed, obviously, or else they wouldn't want to have sex with kids.  About the other characteristics, here is an example: Travelling to Thailand to have sex with a few month old baby (read about it) is an aggressive/disturbing/unstable/insane/disgusting act. Whoever disagrees with this needs to get his head checked.



We've already established I don't view it as a disease or mental impairment. Your argument is invalid. 





> They do..... but they also have a very strong desire to carry it out.
> 
> *“Research shows pedophiles have a high rate of repeat offenses – with study statistics varying between 65 and 80 percent.” Experts say pedophilia may never be cured | SummitDaily.com*



So the child molesters are likely to repeatedly molest children. Shocker. 





> The information I have cited is enough evidence that most pedophiles are individuals that are not to be trusted, and that they should be treated as dangerous people. Here is another gem for you:
> 
> *“The average pedophile will victimize 244 children in their lifetime, according to the Massachusetts Children’s Trust Fund, a child advocacy group working to prevent child abuse and neglect.” an inch from murder - weblog: Outrage follows cop child abuse sentence*



The information you cited applies only to pedophiles who are sex offenders. It does not take into scope the harmless pedos. 





> LOL, show me REAL statistics please, as I have shown you. Words mean nothing. I say pedophiles are dangerous, and I backed it up. Now prove me wrong.



No, you showed only that pedophiles comprise the majority of child molesters, not that most pedophiles are child molesters. You fail at statistics. 





> And it's funny how you automatically assume that every molestation that occurs is documented. There are children keep these things in themselves for many years, sometimes never speaking out about it. Some children tell someone immediately, and others wait many years until they speak out. I have shown enough evidence that they are not to be trusted. You have shown absolutely nothing except a strong desire to defend them.



And what of the pedophiles who keep it to themselves all the years? Due to increasing societal pressures on them (mostly from the likes of you), many are incredibly ashamed of their attraction. 





> You have no case.



My case is that dreams have no impact on reality, and pedophiles have a right to dream as they see fit. Trying to make them dream of something else or make them feel like shit for dreaming what they do is arbitrary bullshit of the finest quality. 





> Tell that to a father's face who's little daughter was raped by a pedo. I'd pay to see that.



How is this even relevant? Obviously a pedophile who molests a child is not in their right mind. Arguing with someone who is deeply emotionally disturbed and traumatized will solve nothing. 





> What in the world are you babbling about? Statistics show that they are not to be trusted.



Says the man who uses statistics to back up his argument. 





> Once you start off wrong, nothing right will follow. My argument was to use lucid dreaming as a treatment for pedophilia instead of using lucid dreaming to feed pedophilic fantasies with more pedophilic fantasies. 
> 
> *A 1994 National Institute of Health survey of 453 pedophiles, conducted by Dr. Gene Abel, showed these criminals were collectively responsible for the molestation of over 67,000 children. That’s an average of 148 children per individual pedophile.*



And I argue that there is nothing an individual "should" or should not dream about. It is their mind, their rights, and their privacy. 

Look, more statistics. More statistics that again take survey of an incredible minority. More statistics that you are brandishing about with absolutely no idea how to use them. 





> Don't dance around the question PLEASE.  You "assume" way too much here. You don't know if he molested anyone or not. Maybe he did and no one spoke out, or maybe people spoke out and you didn't find out about it. Simple scenario:
> 
> You know he's a babysitter.
> You know he's a pedophile. 
> You know he dreams about having sex with children.
> 
> And you would let him babysit your kid?



As I've said, I don't give two shits what he dreams about. All that counts is his actions. As long as his record turns up clean, why the hell not? Would it be any worse than taking my chances on some other random stranger, with no clue about what he dreams of or who he touches? At least I know this guy is a pedo. If anything happens to my child, I know where to look. No matter who you hire, you take a chance. You're inviting a stranger into your home. The only reason I'd decline this guy is because I don't know him and therefore don't trust him. (Of course, if I did know him and could trust him, then certainly.) I'd rather go with the neighborhood high school kid with the 3.5 GPA that I've known for years, just because I can trust him more. 





> It seems the image in your signature tells me why you are so devoted to defending pedophiles.



*sigh* more ad hominem. A surefire mark that you're running out of valid arguments, and so resort to name calling and jibes at my person, instead of my arguments. Grow up.

----------


## mooseantlers

its a pointless argument anyway, what are you going to do go find him and wake him up. Come on, its just a dream, if he really does it thats wrong. But nobody can or should stop him from doing so.

----------


## duke396

Well it's one of those things.. I don't necessarily think it's right but a dream is no one's business except the dreamer's and if a pedophile is molesting children in a dream _instead_ of doing it in real life, that's obviously favorable.

----------


## WhatIsX

lol @ all the pedo statistics... like all pedos are going to admit they are

----------


## Klikko

Yay, let's have dream police cencoring our dreams for us... wooo... What fun that would be.. Dream and let dream you all

----------


## Maeni

mfw this whole thread






> I say no. If you mean the actual definition of pedophile, it means they're already mentally unstable (there's obviously something different in the "wiring upstairs"), so it'd be dangerous to even let them try it in their dreams. They could get ideas, or it could make them want the real thing more.







> Not unless they're behind bars for life, then I could care less what they do in their dreams.  I just think it would tempt them to go for the real thing even more - as someone else mentioned.
> 
> However, I think they should try to be cured/healed of their illness and if that's not possible, as much as I hate to say it - they should be put to rest.  If that sounds harsh, just imagine how you would feel if one of them touched your kid.  
> 
> If I had super powers, my first priority in this world would be to seek & destroy people harming children!





These discussions are becoming so overwhelmingly insulting to me that it's too painful to even make counter arguments at all this bullshit. (I'm not just talking about the two quotes, although they are good examples)
The only thing I can manage to say is thank you, Mario92, for providing some sense in here.

EDIT: First batch of rage.





> I vote no. Can we agree that 'pedophilia' is 'negative craving/addictive behavior'? It shouldn't be lived out in the dream, or should I say 'indulged' in the dream - this will only increase desensitization and further unconscious cravings for gratification. The question is the same as asking, is it OK for a pedophile to sit at home watching 2 hours of kiddie porn every night, in perfect 3d all-immersing-experience home cinema, as long as he's not out on the street affecting kids? No, because the next morning, pedophilia will seem 'a bit less wrong' to him. If a pedophile wants to use LD to live out certain experiences, perhaps examining the cravings, re-living past experiences, etc, in a safe environment and to find liberation - that's a fantastic idea - I wish him every success and happiness. Getting stuck in LDs with some kind of addition is just as bad in LDs as it is in RL - arguably worse, and will lead you further down the path of greed and misery. There's never enough. The only option is to use dreaming as a way up and out, not down!
> 
> I've had many absolutely amazing, 'wow' lucid dreams. The first time I flew and had good control over it for example was incredible - I also had perfect memory of the entire 2 minute LD. As I walked through the mall the next day, I kept smiling with ever such a strong urge to try and push up with my left foot and fly as I had in the LD - fortunately I didn't try! I even felt completely different, floaty and light, and have believed that it was entirely possible to just fly there and then. Does anyone really want a guy walking through the mall who just spent an hour early that morning in a dream molesting children? I can only imagine the dreamer's uncontrollable urge to continue what had been absolutely acceptable and without any consequence in the dream.



Yay for sarcasm:
I vote no. Can we agree that 'violence' is 'negative craving/addictive behavior'? It shouldn't be lived out in the dream, or should I say 'indulged' in the dream - this will only increase desensitization and further unconscious cravings for gratification. The question is the same as asking, is it OK for a violent person to sit at home playing 2 hours of grand theft auto every night, in perfect 3d all-immersing-experience home cinema, as long as he's not out on the street killing people? No, because the next morning, violence will seem 'a bit less wrong' to him. If a violent person wants to use LD to live out certain experiences, perhaps examining the cravings, re-living past experiences, etc, in a safe environment and to find liberation - that's a fantastic idea - I wish him every success and happiness. Getting stuck in LDs with some kind of addition is just as bad in LDs as it is in RL - arguably worse, and will lead you further down the path of greed and misery. There's never enough. The only option is to use dreaming as a way up and out, not down!





> I've had many absolutely amazing, 'wow' lucid dreams. The first time I flew and had good control over it for example was incredible - I also had perfect memory of the entire 2 minute LD. As I walked through the mall the next day, I kept smiling with ever such a strong urge to try and push up with my left foot and fly as I had in the LD - fortunately I didn't try! I even felt completely different, floaty and light, *and have believed that it was entirely possible to just fly there and then*. Does anyone really want a guy walking through the mall who just spent an hour early that morning in a dream molesting children? I can only imagine the dreamer's uncontrollable urge to continue what had been absolutely acceptable and without any consequence in the dream.



I think that's just you. What the fuck, man? Get a grip on reality.

EDIT2:





> It is harmless to the point until it starts feeding your desires to try it out in real life. Thinking itself is harmless, but thinking can lead to wishing, and wishing can lead to plotting.



What makes you think this happens? This is a complete assumption.





> I have nothing against homosexuals (for example) who have intercourse with consenting adults, as long as they do not try to force their lifestyle onto others. Pedophiles however, are not in the same category as homosexuals.



Durrr, stockpile argument. A similarity was provided, and you went "They are not the same!". Well that's original.
The example was perfectly reasonable. There was a time when people thought that homosexuality was a disease that could be cured. They tried, it didn't work.
No matter how different you want homosexuality and pedophilia to be, it doesn't change the fact that *none of them can be cured.*





> I never said there is harm in having a fantasy, but the question is, who guarantees it will only remain a fantasy? Do you really think all the pedophiles in the world just started to abuse children without having any fantasies prior to these acts? What happens if the "lucid pedophile" starts getting more and more into it, and wishing every night to rape a kid in his lucid dream? He forms an addiction, and it's "OK" as long as it's a fantasy, but what if he starts having a dry spell with lucid dreams? What if he starts having insomnia and gets cut off from his pedo-dream-world for a longer period?



Same assumption as before. There is no proof that fantasies lead to some form of addiction that leads to action.





> If he is mentally stable nothing bad should happen, but what if he isn't?



Then THAT is the problem. The fantasies are not the problem, but the fact that he is not mentally stable is a problem. 





> I am "bending people to my arbitrary whims" because I do not encourage pedophilic fantasies? *Perhaps I am having this discussion right now with someone who has such fantasies themselves*.



nice argument sir





> Would you let a man who on regular basis has intercourse with children in his dreams babysit your kid?



If a babysitter regularly dreams about intercourse with children, I think it is safe to assume that he would never tell anyone about it.
So from that, I think it is also safe to assume that there are plenty of babysitters who are doing their job perfectly well, and dream about having intercourse with children regularly.

EDIT3:





> Please don't twist what I said. Among pedophiles are also decent people, and I have never denied that. They control their desires as much as they can, and would never attempt to abuse a child. The question is are the majority of pedophiles decent people, statistically speaking? The answer is no, according to hundreds of studies and statistics.



I am one, and I don't think I appear on any studies or statistics. Hmm. Well, I suppose I am the only pedophile in the world that those statistics haven't taken in account... Right?
The answer to your question is yes, according to logic. Of course you can go into a prison, collect all the people who meet the criteria for pedophilia and conclude "Great scott, it appears that 100% of them have committed a crime"

As a side note, I have heard differently about the statistics you have. 95% of child abuse cases by pedophiles? I can't provide a source, but I feel I must point out that that is not what I've heard.





> If he really would, then he is either a complete idiot, or a pedophile himself. I don't see another explanation.



you are a master at argumentation

EDIT4:





> *“The average pedophile will victimize 244 children in their lifetime,*



What the fuck? First I was gonna make a joke something like "Wow, I have some work to do then", but then I was just overtaken by a feeling of "How the fuck is that even possible?"

EDIT5:





> lol @ all the pedo statistics... like all pedos are going to admit they are



The one thing that Jakob does not think about is this.
All those statistics only ask sex offenders. There are thousands and thousands of pedophiles that nobody knows about, either because they're ashamed of it, because they know of the consequences if anybody knew, or just because it's irrelevant. That alone completely cripples and destroys any statistics.

----------


## Maria92

I luv you, Maeni. :3

----------


## Gr8God

No kids getting sexually harrased or even further = Gr8God doesn't care  ::D:

----------


## Maeni

No I luv you Mario :3
Every time I copied a new set of quotes to rage at, when I was done I would scroll down and see an infinitely more cool-headed and rational set of arguments by you.
I cannot keep my cool here, so I really appreciate that you're able to be the voice of reason here <3

----------


## celestialelixir

OP/others act like pedos are some kind of animals. They're human too, and just because they have a desire that society frowns upon doesn't mean they shouldn't be able to have their fantasies. Yes, they should be able to dream about molesting children, and anything else they want to dream about. Who's right is it to tell anyone that they can't dream, whether it be something _you_ approve of or not?

----------


## JussiKala

> OP/others act like pedos are some kind of animals. They're human too, and just because they have a desire that society frowns upon doesn't mean they shouldn't be able to have their fantasies. Yes, they should be able to dream about molesting children, and anything else they want to dream about. Who's right is it to tell anyone that they can't dream, whether it be something _you_ approve of or not?



Bingo. Trying to justify otherwise is just trying to break other peoples rights. Who cares if the person is dreaming about it? "OOh, it might encourage him/her to act out the fantasies IRL!!!11 zomg!". What? It does not matter at all if he / she dreams about it or not here, it is not your place to decide which may or may not increase the temptation for the person. If it increases the temptation, it's still none of your business. It's that persons choice if he / she decides to go out and attack children. It is not the result of him / her dreaming about it. It's the result of the choice made by that person to attack that chlid, and that's that. There is a possibility that some motivation came out of dreaming about it, but it doesn't matter, the person still has a choice to make on whether or not to attack the children. 

It's actions, not thoughts/dreams, that matter.

----------


## Aelexe

pe·do·phile/ˈpedəˌfīl/
Noun: A person who is sexually attracted to children.

Just to clarify for those suggesting rape constantly.

----------


## Maeni

> *“The average pedophile will victimize 244 children in their lifetime, according to the Massachusetts Children’s Trust Fund, a child advocacy group working to prevent child abuse and neglect.” http://www.aninchfrommurder.com/blog...ge_follows.php*



No, seriously, what the fuck?
Initially I just wrote it off and didn't think more of it because it was just so rediculous. But then I thought about it.
Now I'm really curious. Where the fuck do they have this from? Is it a bad joke? Do they really think they can make people believe that the *average* pedophile will molest *244* (TWO HUNDRED) children? Or do they mean something else? Some argue that you will victimize a child by looking at child pornography. Is that what they mean? Sounds a little more realistic that way. A little.

But if they actually mean, truly and physically victimizing them personally, then that is just insulting to everybody's intelligence. I just checked with a little google search; Josef Fritzl abused six children. Six.
Maybe it's some kind of Hitler deal? You know how they say that Hitler killed 5 million jews? I mean, he didn't really kill them, he was just responsible for it. So is there some kind of wacky pedophile out there, rounding up children and performing some kind of pedophile holocaust? That would explain the insane average.

----------


## Hukif

I'm seeing a trend of statistical contradiction here, for example, the mayo-clinic says 240 average, other research studies say 140... the "Abel, Mittleman, and Becker" one says non-incest average is 282, while most other sites that make a distinction between child molester and pedo say that 60% of the cases are incest-like, and the minority is on strangers. So... yeah, either the ones with the huge numbers are not making a distinction (doubt it) or they have HUGE bias towards pedo people. Not to mention their numbers pale in comparison to the child-molesting cases of church-cases in numbers, and most priests said they are not pedophilic. Yup, can't trust the data like this.

Edit: Forgot to mention, mayo-clinic study also says 95% are pedos, while interviews with child-molester somehow say that only 7% identify themselves as such?

----------


## sloth

I'm on the side of letting your mind do what it needs to do. I have worked out problems this way. 
One could say that it would tempt them more.
but one could just as easily say that it could nullify temptation.
When you add the fact that our minds are the one true thing we have that is close to being free (even though we are all brainwashed), it boils down to freedom.

----------


## SKA

If they cannot "cure" or "let go" this unhealthy obsession, then..Yes. Most certainly yes.

Whenever possible these people should be helped to find the root of this twisted desire and "set it straight" again.
If a pedophile does not want to/cannot let go of his twisted desires to violate children, then let him violate Dream Character-children, rather than actual children.

----------


## sloth

Poor dream children. lol

----------


## Robot_Butler

People can do whatever they want in their dreams.  Sometimes people become attracted to something because of it's illicit, illegal, and dangerous nature.  Maybe if they knew they could do it in a dream whenever they wanted, it would lose some of it's appeal.

----------


## Ev

Lol, it bothers me to see this topic on top of general discussion for the past few days... Do whatever you want in your dreams....

----------


## Empedocles

> Durrr, stockpile argument. A similarity was provided, and you went "They are not the same!". Well that's original.
> The example was perfectly reasonable. There was a time when people thought that homosexuality was a disease that could be cured. They tried, it didn't work.
> No matter how different you want homosexuality and pedophilia to be, it doesn't change the fact that none of them can be cured.



No, that's definitely not a fact, but an opinion. Some claim it can be cured, some claim it can't be cured. You can easily find sources for each position.





> Same assumption as before. There is no proof that fantasies lead to some form of addiction that leads to action.



What kind of proof do you want for such things? Fantasies will lead some people to actions, and on other people they won't have any effect. As I said, it is not a problem for stable people who can control themselves.





> Then THAT is the problem. The fantasies are not the problem, but the fact that he is not mentally stable is a problem.



You just realized that, huh?





> nice argument sir



It wasn't an argument but a simple conclusion.





> If a babysitter regularly dreams about intercourse with children, I think it is safe to assume that he would never tell anyone about it.
> So from that, I think it is also safe to assume that there are plenty of babysitters who are doing their job perfectly well, and dream about having intercourse with children regularly.



Again, dancing around the question just like your buddy Super Mario. But of course you will answer it's okay, because you are one of them.





> I am one, and I don't think I appear on any studies or statistics. Hmm. Well, I suppose I am the only pedophile in the world that those statistics haven't taken in account... Right?
> The answer to your question is yes, according to logic. Of course you can go into a prison, collect all the people who meet the criteria for pedophilia and conclude "Great scott, it appears that 100% of them have committed a crime"



You just can't seem to grasp the fact that statistically speaking pedophiles are not to be trusted.





> As a side note, I have heard differently about the statistics you have. 95% of child abuse cases by pedophiles? I can't provide a source, but I feel I must point out that that is not what I've heard.



Yes, of course, you have heard differently.  ::roll:: 





> you are a master at argumentation



And you are a master of idiocy.





> What the fuck? First I was gonna make a joke something like "Wow, I have some work to do then", but then I was just overtaken by a feeling of "How the fuck is that even possible?"



Wanting to make a joke about abusing children sexually really shows how kind-hearted and loving you people are. Furthermore, why does this number sound unbelieveable to you? Let's say a pedophile lives to the age of 80. Why is it unreasonable to believe that he can victimize 244 children?





> The one thing that Jakob does not think about is this.
> All those statistics only ask sex offenders. There are thousands and thousands of pedophiles that nobody knows about, either because they're ashamed of it, because they know of the consequences if anybody knew, or just because it's irrelevant. That alone completely cripples and destroys any statistics.



And there are so many victims who do not speak out for many years. Some even live their whole life and die without telling anyone.

----------


## Jay12341235

Murder is bad. I'm sure we'd all kill someone in our lucids if we would have the chance. Does that make you a murderer? Are you going to murder someone because of it?

Even if you said yes, how do you plan on stopping it?

----------


## Empedocles

> We've already established I don't view it as a disease or mental impairment. Your argument is invalid.



It is not relevant that "you" don't view it as a disease.

"Mental health professionals agree that pedophilia should never be considered normal but is a disease." Dr. Herbert Wagemaker, a biological psychiatrist who is the author of many books and videos on mental illness

"The International Classification of Diseases (ICD) defines pedophilia as a "disorder of adult personality and behaviour" in which there is a sexual preference for children of prepubertal or early pubertal age.[8] The term has a range of definitions as found in psychiatry, psychology, the vernacular, and law enforcement." Pedophilia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Mental health professionals agree that pedophilia should never be considered normal, because it is truly a disease. None of the things that make homosexuality a normal variation of human sexuality apply to pedophilia." Pedophilia (child molestation) Information on MedicineNet.com





> So the child molesters are likely to repeatedly molest children. Shocker.



Pedophilic child molesters, yes. 

There are those who aren't pedophiles but will molest a child. Pedophilic child molesters outnumber them.





> The information you cited applies only to pedophiles who are sex offenders. It does not take into scope the harmless pedos.



I showed you that many pedophiles are indeed sex offenders. Keep in mind that there are many kids who never speak out about what happened to them.





> No, you showed only that pedophiles comprise the majority of child molesters, not that most pedophiles are child molesters. You fail at statistics.



I never claimed that most pedophiles are child molesters. I claimed that many pedophiles are not to be trusted, and backed it up with sources. You have to this day not produced one single citation.





> And what of the pedophiles who keep it to themselves all the years? Due to increasing societal pressures on them (mostly from the likes of you), many are incredibly ashamed of their attraction.



I have nothing against those who have not acted upon their fantasies. Those who have however, I have no sympathy for. None, period. You abuse a child, you deserve the death penalty. And regarding these others who haven't acted upon their fantasies (yet), no offense, but stay away from my children.





> My case is that dreams have no impact on reality, and pedophiles have a right to dream as they see fit. Trying to make them dream of something else or make them feel like shit for dreaming what they do is arbitrary bullshit of the finest quality.



They do have the right to dream as they see fit. Where have I ever claimed they should be forbidden from dreaming about these things? I only said it shouldn't be encouraged as some sort of solution. I said the first thing a pedophile with lucid dreaming skills should do is attempt to cure himself through lucid dreams. If he really tries and is unable to do so, then I have no problem with him dreaming about his fantasies. Of course, they would have to remain nothing more than fantasies.





> How is this even relevant? Obviously a pedophile who molests a child is not in their right mind. Arguing with someone who is deeply emotionally disturbed and traumatized will solve nothing.



Many of them are not in their right mind, obviously.





> Says the man who uses statistics to back up his argument.



Ok?





> And I argue that there is nothing an individual "should" or should not dream about. It is their mind, their rights, and their privacy.



Yes, if a pedophile is mentally stable and would never think about acting upon his fantasies, and if he is able to completely control his urges, what he dreams about is not important to me either.





> Look, more statistics. More statistics that again take survey of an incredible minority. More statistics that you are brandishing about with absolutely no idea how to use them.



453 pedophiles being responsible for over 67,000 molestations means nothing to you?





> As I've said, I don't give two shits what he dreams about. All that counts is his actions. As long as his record turns up clean, why the hell not? Would it be any worse than taking my chances on some other random stranger, with no clue about what he dreams of or who he touches? At least I know this guy is a pedo. If anything happens to my child, I know where to look. No matter who you hire, you take a chance. You're inviting a stranger into your home. The only reason I'd decline this guy is because I don't know him and therefore don't trust him. (Of course, if I did know him and could trust him, then certainly.) I'd rather go with the neighborhood high school kid with the 3.5 GPA that I've known for years, just because I can trust him more.



But if he constantly dreams about it and desires these things, you would still have no problem with him playing with your child when they're alone? Are you kidding me?





> *sigh* more ad hominem. A surefire mark that you're running out of valid arguments, and so resort to name calling and jibes at my person, instead of my arguments. Grow up.



Lol? The image in your signature and your failed attempts to defend pedophiles just give me the feeling that you are one of them.

----------


## Empedocles

> If they cannot "cure" or "let go" this unhealthy obsession, then..Yes. Most certainly yes.
> 
> Whenever possible these people should be helped to find the root of this twisted desire and "set it straight" again.
> If a pedophile does not want to/cannot let go of his twisted desires to violate children, then let him violate Dream Character-children, rather than actual children.



That is exactly what I am saying this whole time.

----------


## Empedocles

> I luv you, Maeni. :3







> No I luv you Mario :3



 ::lol::  ::lol::  ::lol::

----------


## mooseantlers

> if a pedophile is molesting children in a dream _instead_ of doing it in real life, that's obviously favorable.



Yes, and due to the realism of lucid dreams, it is so close to the real thing, that they could continue to do it in their dream. Nothing can make you do something. It's lucid dreaming, not mind control.

----------


## tommo

> *What do you think? Should pedophiles use lucid dreaming to live out their fantasies?*



No, I think they should fuck real children.  *sigh*





> "Mental health professionals agree that pedophilia should never be considered normal but is a disease." Dr. Herbert Wagemaker, a biological psychiatrist who is the author of many books and videos on mental illness
> 
> *"The International Classification of Diseases (ICD) defines pedophilia as a "disorder of adult personality and behaviour" in which there is a sexual preference for children of prepubertal or early pubertal age.*[8] The term has a range of definitions as found in psychiatry, psychology, the vernacular, and law enforcement." Pedophilia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> "Mental health professionals agree that pedophilia should never be considered normal, because it is truly a disease. None of the things that make homosexuality a normal variation of human sexuality apply to pedophilia." Pedophilia (child molestation) Information on MedicineNet.com



It is completely normal to be attracted to someone who has hit puberty.  Why do you think there are obvious signs of puberty?  Because it shows they are ready to start having children, or fertilising eggs.

Just because a person is grown older, doesn't mean their taste in people has changed to older people too.  It's perfectly normal.

And no government agency or psychologist who is receiving funding is ever going to admit that pedophilia is normal.

You see this all the time.  As soon as someone is free of their constraints within a certain company or establishment, they come out with the truth.

Anyway, kind of off-topic a bit.

The point is, try to stop someone from dreaming about fucking children.
*End of Discussion.*

----------


## Maria92

> It is not relevant that "you" don't view it as a disease.
> 
> "Mental health professionals agree that pedophilia should never be considered normal but is a disease." Dr. Herbert Wagemaker, a biological psychiatrist who is the author of many books and videos on mental illness
> 
> "The International Classification of Diseases (ICD) defines pedophilia as a "disorder of adult personality and behaviour" in which there is a sexual preference for children of prepubertal or early pubertal age.[8] The term has a range of definitions as found in psychiatry, psychology, the vernacular, and law enforcement." Pedophilia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> "Mental health professionals agree that pedophilia should never be considered normal, because it is truly a disease. None of the things that make homosexuality a normal variation of human sexuality apply to pedophilia." Pedophilia (child molestation) Information on MedicineNet.com



That's a nice set of opinions. 





> Pedophilic child molesters, yes. 
> 
> There are those who aren't pedophiles but will molest a child. Pedophilic child molesters outnumber them.



Once again, what a shocker. 





> I showed you that many pedophiles are indeed sex offenders. Keep in mind that there are many kids who never speak out about what happened to them.



You showed nothing of the sort. All you showed was that, of child molestation cases, pedophiles make up most of the offenders. That DOES NOT MEAN THAT MOST PEDOPHILES OR EVEN A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER ARE CHILD MOLESTERS. Comprehend this. Understand this. Learn about the statistics you cite before claiming they support a claim they do not. 





> I never claimed that most pedophiles are child molesters. I claimed that many pedophiles are not to be trusted, and backed it up with sources. You have to this day not produced one single citation.



You're making the positive claim. You have not backed it up. You backed up an entirely separate claim (two of them, in fact: 1) that pedophiles compromise the majority of child molestation offenders, 2) that pedophilic child molesters are more likely to be repeat offenders). I'll say it again: you have yet to show that "many" pedophiles are dangerous. It is the incredible claim. Burden of proof rests on your shoulders. 





> I have nothing against those who have not acted upon their fantasies. Those who have however, I have no sympathy for. None, period. You abuse a child, you deserve the death penalty. And regarding these others who haven't acted upon their fantasies (yet), no offense, but stay away from my children.



Progress. The death penalty is a separate debate, but those who act in reality to harm children, do deserve punishment. 





> They do have the right to dream as they see fit. Where have I ever claimed they should be forbidden from dreaming about these things? I only said it shouldn't be encouraged as some sort of solution. I said the first thing a pedophile with lucid dreaming skills should do is attempt to cure himself through lucid dreams. If he really tries and is unable to do so, then I have no problem with him dreaming about his fantasies. Of course, they would have to remain nothing more than fantasies.



That's my problem: that they _should_ try to "cure" themselves _before_ doing as they please. Silly bullshit. 





> Many of them are not in their right mind, obviously.



You've yet to show that. 





> Ok?



Nice rebuttal. 





> Yes, if a pedophile is mentally stable and would never think about acting upon his fantasies, and if he is able to completely control his urges, what he dreams about is not important to me either.



I don't care if he can or can't control his urges, has already molested children, is serving time behind bars, is waiting on death row, is insane, whatever. His dreams, his rights. 





> 453 pedophiles being responsible for over 67,000 molestations means nothing to you?



We're arguing a general matter. That statistic is a survey of only convicted pedophilic child molesters (and a remarkably busy lot, at that). It speaks nothing of the general population we are discussing. It is entirely and utterly irrelevant. What's more, it is a dubious claim at best. 





> But if he constantly dreams about it and desires these things, you would still have no problem with him playing with your child when they're alone? Are you kidding me?



As I've said, dreams don't mean a goddamn thing. If I can trust this bro, I don't have a problem. 





> Lol? The image in your signature and your failed attempts to defend pedophiles just give me the feeling that you are one of them.



And it's official, you've run out of valid arguments. We can argue my sexuality all day long, but it will serve no purpose. You're not worth my time.

----------


## Betropper

> "Mental health professionals agree that pedophilia should never be considered normal but is a disease." Dr. Herbert Wagemaker, a biological psychiatrist who is the author of many books and videos on mental illness
> 
> "The International Classification of Diseases (ICD) defines pedophilia as a "disorder of adult personality and behaviour" in which there is a sexual preference for children of prepubertal or early pubertal age.[8] The term has a range of definitions as found in psychiatry, psychology, the vernacular, and law enforcement." Pedophilia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> "Mental health professionals agree that pedophilia should never be considered normal, because it is truly a disease. None of the things that make homosexuality a normal variation of human sexuality apply to pedophilia." Pedophilia (child molestation) Information on MedicineNet.com



Well then. Explain how you come upon this 'disease' and why many people have a -phillia in the world. See if you can find THAT number and tell me that they are all diseased.





> They do have the right to dream as they see fit. Where have I ever claimed they should be forbidden from dreaming about these things? I only said it shouldn't be encouraged as some sort of solution. I said the first thing a pedophile with lucid dreaming skills should do is attempt to cure himself through lucid dreams. If he really tries and is unable to do so, then I have no problem with him dreaming about his fantasies. Of course, they would have to remain nothing more than fantasies.



Read my last post.





> Lol? The image in your signature and your failed attempts to defend pedophiles just give me the feeling that you are one of them.



Ok. Let's pretend for a moment that he IS a pedophile. (I'm not saying you are), but wouldn't he have a better perspective on this than you? You cannot speak for them if you know nothing about how they think. You only supported him.

Mario92 pretty much got everything else down though.

----------


## Maeni

> No, that's definitely not a fact, but an opinion. Some claim it can be cured, some claim it can't be cured. You can easily find sources for each position.



Sure you can. The thing is that people have already tried. There's been tons of attempts to "cure" homosexuals. It never worked. All it ever achieved was making those people ashamed of themselves.
But either way, you're right. We don't actually know whether we can change people's sexualities. We just haven't found a way to do it yet.





> What kind of proof do you want for such things? Fantasies will lead some people to actions, and on other people they won't have any effect. As I said, it is not a problem for stable people who can control themselves.



True, but you seem to be saying that pedophiles by definition are unstable people who cannot control themselves. That is as true as when Jack Thompson says that people will become violent people because they play video games. I think you're right that _some people_ actually will become violent people from playing video games, and similarly, _some pedophiles_ will become child molesters from their fantasies/pornography/dreams/talking with other pedophiles and so on. But you're accusing the wrong thing, you seem to be saying that people shouldn't have those lucid dreams because some people are mentally unstable enough that it will make them into rapists. But it's really not the lucid dream's fault, it's their mental instability.





> You just realized that, huh?



You're the one who seems to say that it's the fantasy's fault for the pedophile's action, rather than his own mental instability.





> It wasn't an argument but a simple conclusion.



It was an irrelevant comment. The only purpose it served was to insult the other person.
You're using a very convinient logic. Basically you concluded that he was a pedophile himself, and therefore his arguments are invalid.
Earlier you also stated that if he really had the opinions he had, he was either a complete idiot and/or needed to get his head checked.

Very, very convinient. You could use that towards any group of people and nobody would be able to disprove you.
"I hate black people, they're all criminals. Oh, you're defending black people? Then you're either black yourself, stupid or insane."
"I hate gay people, they're all gay. Oh, you're defending gays? Then you're either gay yourself, stupid or insane."
"I hate tall people, they're responsible for the holocaust. Oh, you're defending tall people? Then you're either tall yourself, responsible for the holocaust or insane."

See, you provided yourself a safe way around listening to any arguments. Can you not see that this is a flawed way to go about this discussion?





> Again, dancing around the question just like your buddy Super Mario. But of course you will answer it's okay, because you are one of them.



Welp, if you want me to say it, I'll do it. I don't think I would let just any pedophile babysit my children. But you know, when you only know 1 detail about a person, your brain fills in the blanks. So of course you're not going to get a very good image of a person if the 1 detail you know is something that is commonly seen as very negative. Now if I knew the pedophile personally, and trusted him, then of course I would let him babysit my children.





> You just can't seem to grasp the fact that statistically speaking pedophiles are not to be trusted.



The statistics are inaccurate. As I said, if you want to see how many pedophiles are good people, and how many are child molesters, you'd need to gather all the pedophiles. It's simply a fact that nobody have ever gathered all the pedophiles. Why is that a fact? Because I am one, and I have never been in a study. Sure, that's just 1 person, so it doesn't change the statistics in any significant way. But do you really think that there aren't more of that kind of people? We don't know how many pedophiles there are in the world, so we cannot make any real statistics.





> Yes, of course, you have heard differently.



I admit, that comment wasn't an argument, I may be wrong.





> And you are a master of idiocy.



I was merely sarcastically referring to your very clever and convinient logic that allows you to bypass any arguments thrown at you. Basically, anything me and Mario say, you can throw it right out the window because you've established a nice little system where, if we disagree with you, we're either stupid, insane or pedophiles.
"Anyone who disagrees with me are stupid"





> Wanting to make a joke about abusing children sexually really shows how kind-hearted and loving you people are. Furthermore, why does this number sound unbelieveable to you? Let's say a pedophile lives to the age of 80. Why is it unreasonable to believe that he can victimize 244 children?



How do you imagine an average pedophile victimizes children? Do you think they daily kidnap a new kid? The vast majority of child molestation cases happen in families, and I think most families don't have 244 children.

Also, jumping to conclusions about my character and personality has no relevance.





> And there are so many victims who do not speak out for many years. Some even live their whole life and die without telling anyone.



I am willing to believe that, but there's no way you can put a number to that, because, as you said yourself, they've never told anybody. You can guess all you like, but nothing will ever be statistically correct before you can gather any real data.

----------


## Hukif

Ok, did even more research. Mayo clinic seems to have bias towards pedophilic people, also in their article, the 240+ average derives from people in jail + people not in jail, whose numbers is MUCH lower. Also, all of their subjects, or most of their subjects are from people who are child-molesters and pedophilic who had a legal issue already, so it is no surprise that their % is so high.

In fact, if we put their numbers together with this: Catholic sex abuse cases - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia even at the high number of 95%, it would plummet down to 33%, so they either have bias, or did their maths wrong, everyone knows that in statistics the target subject must be random for an accurate statistical study.

Also, study by "Psychologist Vernon Quinsey rejects the hypothesis that sexual abuse as a child turns someone into a pedophile." because of the study subjects used, the information can not be trusted according to him, and thus the theory is very weak.

Another thing, the study by mayo clinic reports that a primary cause for the perpetrators is the stress, I wonder what kind of people, public shaming and constant insults over their sexual orientation lead to this?

Now then, I guess this should stop the nonsense using the mayo-clinic numbers.

Another thing, someone on my family was molested as a child, and they still refuse to insult someone over their sexual orientation, according to them, it is best to teach them why it is wrong to act on their desires and ways to get rid of the sex drive, since they know I can control dreams, they think it is safe for them to use dreaming as a way to erase such desires, because they don't want other people passing through the same as them. Hm... not using he/she is a bother, oh well.

----------


## Maeni

> It is not relevant that "you" don't view it as a disease.
> 
> "Mental health professionals agree that pedophilia should never be considered normal but is a disease." Dr. Herbert Wagemaker, a biological psychiatrist who is the author of many books and videos on mental illness
> 
> "The International Classification of Diseases (ICD) defines pedophilia as a "disorder of adult personality and behaviour" in which there is a sexual preference for children of prepubertal or early pubertal age.[8] The term has a range of definitions as found in psychiatry, psychology, the vernacular, and law enforcement." Pedophilia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> "Mental health professionals agree that pedophilia should never be considered normal, because it is truly a disease. None of the things that make homosexuality a normal variation of human sexuality apply to pedophilia." Pedophilia (child molestation) Information on MedicineNet.com



This is simply flawed. Quick google definition of "disease":

_Disease: A disorder of structure or function in a human, animal, or plant, esp. one that produces specific signs or symptoms or that affects a specific location and is not simply a direct result of physical injury_

Continuing on, quick definition of "disorder"

_Disorder: A disruption of normal physical or mental functions; a disease or abnormal condition_

and again;

_Normal: Conforming to a standard; usual, typical, or expected_

Sure, by this definition, pedophilia is a disease. It is a disruption of the usual mental function in a human, and it also produces specific symptoms (attraction to kids)
But oh wait, homosexuality is also a disruption of the usual mental function in a human, and it also produces specific symptoms (attracted to same gender)

In short, it doesn't make a lick of difference whether you call it a disease, a mental disorder, a sexual orientation or a burger, you still can't cure it.

On top of that, the argument is flawed in itself. It says that pedophilia should never be considered normal. Normal is just something that the majority of people does. It is objective. Having 2 ears is normal, because most people have it. You cannot "consider" something normal or abnormal. Either it is or it is not.
The same goes for homosexuality. They claim that homosexuality is a "normal" sexual oriention. If the majority of people in the world are homosexuals, then yes, it is the normal sexual orientation. If not, then it is not normal.
And you know what difference that makes?
None at all.

Did you know that homosexuality was only fully removed from the list of mental disorders in 1986?





> *I never claimed that most pedophiles are child molesters.* I claimed that many pedophiles are not to be trusted, and backed it up with sources. You have to this day not produced one single citation.









> are the majority of pedophiles decent people, statistically speaking? The answer is no,







> “The average pedophile will victimize 244 children in their lifetime,







> the fact that statistically speaking pedophiles are not to be trusted.



First quote literally says "the majority" implying exactly that *most* pedophiles aren't decent people. (I.e. child molesters)
The second says that the average _(average: An amount, standard, level, or rate regarded as usual or ordinary (I.e. the majority))_ are not only child molesters, but child molesters who molest at least 244 kids.
The last one implicitly implies that all pedophiles are not to be trusted.

Yes you did.





> They do have the right to dream as they see fit. Where have I ever claimed they should be forbidden from dreaming about these things? I only said it shouldn't be encouraged as some sort of solution. I said the first thing a pedophile with lucid dreaming skills should do is attempt to cure himself through lucid dreams. If he really tries and is unable to do so, then I have no problem with him dreaming about his fantasies. Of course, they would have to remain nothing more than fantasies.



With this, I can't see how our discussion got this far out. I agree with most of this.
I think it _should_ be encouraged. I also disagree with your use of "should", but if the pedophile felt the need to cure himself, improve himself or learn more about himself, lucid dreaming could be a very good way to do that. If the person wanted to try to cure himself of pedophilia through lucid dreaming, I'd tell him good luck and that he shouldn't kick himself too hard if he doesn't succeed. But other then that, I agree.

----------


## Empedocles

> It is completely normal to be attracted to someone who has hit puberty.  Why do you think there are obvious signs of puberty?  Because it shows they are ready to start having children, or fertilising eggs.
> 
> Just because a person is grown older, doesn't mean their taste in people has changed to older people too.  It's perfectly normal.
> 
> And no government agency or psychologist who is receiving funding is ever going to admit that pedophilia is normal.



Please shut up.  ::roll::  I am not and would never be sexually attracted to a 13 year old girl, just because she might have large breasts. And if a 17 or 18 year old looks many years younger than her real age, then to me personally, this is a turn off. Even in porn when I see female performers trying to look young with ponytails and school-girl outfits, I simply cannot get aroused. This is the truth, and I would be willing to go on a polygraph.

Furthermore, just because a woman is physically able to have sexual intercourse doesn't mean she is mentally capable of handling such a thing. So if you try to justify pedophilia by saying a woman is physically ready for sex at age 13, then this is simply despicable.

Either way, speak for yourself please. 

I prefer women, thank you.





> Sure you can. The thing is that people have already tried. There's been tons of attempts to "cure" homosexuals. It never worked. All it ever achieved was making those people ashamed of themselves.
> But either way, you're right. We don't actually know whether we can change people's sexualities. We just haven't found a way to do it yet.



Now tell me why I should continue this discussion when you basically label people who claim they've been cured as liars.

As I said, there are those who claim it is possible, and those who claim otherwise. Maybe you tried, and it didn't work for YOU. 

Why can't you get outside of your box and grasp the fact that some might have had success, and aren't liars? The opinions of you and Mario92 are *facts*, and all other claims by other people are *opinions*. It seems that you, as well as Mario92 are just going around in circles:





> That's a nice set of opinions.



Just like your opinion that it is NOT a disease, except these are mental health professionals. What are your qualifications?





> That's my problem: that they _should_ try to "cure" themselves _before_ doing as they please. Silly bullshit.



It is only silly because you are sympathetic to them. I have never in my life seen someone try to discourage pedophiles from trying to change their ways. Until this discussion, that is.





> I don't care if he can or can't control his urges, has already molested children, is serving time behind bars, is waiting on death row, is insane, whatever. His dreams, his rights.



Unfortunately it is not that simple. The fact that he CAN'T control his urges makes him a dangerous person, and that alone should make you question whether using lucid dreaming this way is a good thing. But you just said "you don't care", therefore the discussion is useless. You also don't care if he has already molested children in the past. No comment really.





> We're arguing a general matter. That statistic is a survey of only convicted pedophilic child molesters (and a remarkably busy lot, at that). It speaks nothing of the general population we are discussing. It is entirely and utterly irrelevant. What's more, it is a dubious claim at best.



Of course, everything I cite is dubious, says the pedophile.





> As I've said, dreams don't mean a goddamn thing. If I can trust this bro, I don't have a problem.



You are being dishonest, unlike Maeni, who said he wouldn't allow it. I mean really, letting a pedophile babysit your child just because he "seems a nice person"? This is unbelieveably stupid.





> And it's official, you've run out of valid arguments. We can argue my sexuality all day long, but it will serve no purpose. You're not worth my time.



Your argument is basically this: I don't care whether he is a danger to society. Let him dream whatever he wants, it can't do any harm, no matter if he's already molested someone before, or is insane and/or can't control his urges. Having sex with children in lucid dreams is good for all pedophiles.

----------


## Maria92

> Just like your opinion that it is NOT a disease, except these are mental health professionals. What are your qualifications?



Ad hominem. A logical fallacy. Once again attacking my qualifications and not my arguments. SOME medical experts claim it's a disease. I respectfully disagree.  





> It is only silly because you are sympathetic to them. I have never in my life seen someone try to discourage pedophiles from trying to change their ways. Until this discussion, that is.



If a pedophile wants to change, great. If not, I don't fucking care. They are who they are. As we have seen through countless studies with homosexuals, bisexuals, pedophiles, straight people, whatever, changing one's sexual attraction is difficult at best, impossible at worst. I don't care who or what anyone is attracted to. It's not my business and not my place to decide what they should do with their lives. 





> Unfortunately it is not that simple. The fact that he CAN'T control his urges makes him a dangerous person, and that alone should make you question whether using lucid dreaming this way is a good thing. But you just said "you don't care", therefore the discussion is useless. You also don't care if he has already molested children in the past. No comment really.



My word, you really are remarkably bad at getting the point (oops, that's some ad hominem, isn't it?). What I said was, I don't care who a person is or what they've done, they can dream however the hell they see fit. Their actions in reality and mental conditions determine what we ought to do with their physical selves for their own good, as well as the public's (e.g. imprisonment, mental institutions, therapy). 





> Of course, everything I cite is dubious, says the pedophile.



*sigh*





> You are being dishonest, unlike Maeni, who said he wouldn't allow it. I mean really, letting a pedophile babysit your child just because he "seems a nice person"? This is unbelieveably stupid.



As I've said, if I can trust the babysitter, I have no reason to suspect he would molest my child. Plain and simple. 





> Your argument is basically this: I don't care whether he is a danger to society. Let him dream whatever he wants, it can't do any harm, no matter if he's already molested someone before, or is insane and/or can't control his urges. Having sex with children in lucid dreams is good for all pedophiles.



Chop off that last sentence and you've got it. I don't really see any one way of dreaming being better than another. How we deal with the insane, the public threats, the criminals, is entirely different from dreaming. Trying to regulate how they dream will solve absolutely not a god damned thing.

----------


## kyzz

> No, that's definitely not a fact, but an opinion. Some claim it can be cured, some claim it can't be cured. You can easily find sources for each position.



Only an idiot could ever believe that homosexuality can be cured, and if you're part of such a group, then you too are an idiot.

You can't DISPROVE that it CAN be cured the same way you can't DISPROVE Santa Clause, that DOES NOT mean you give credibility to the idiots that say homosexuality can be cured. Show me those sources you claim to have cured homosexuality and I'll show you their religious and/or pseudo-scientific connections.

I'm not on either side of these debate (besides clearly think pedophilia is mentally unstable), I am however against blind ignorance and downright stupidity, so don't fall into that camp.

----------


## WhatIsX

> pe·do·phile/ˈpedəˌfīl/
> Noun: A person who is sexually attracted to children.
> 
> Just to clarify for those suggesting rape constantly.



 I disagree. Pedo = child, phile = love of. Pedophile = one who loves children.

What most people are talking about are pedosexuals. Yes, semantics, but I think it's an important distinction to make.

----------


## Daydreamer14

This topic sort of came up once before... someone was lucid and they raped someone; I think... anyway, I still think it's wrong. Very wrong. The fact that you would take away someone's freewill in your lucid dream, means that you'd be willing to do the same thing in real life. And if the pedophile hadn't heard of lucid dreaming, they'd be raping real people. Just my opinion, but I think it is very sick. Rape is rape. Even the thought of rape is wrong. If you lucid dream with the intention of rape, then you are almost as bad as someone who does it in waking life.

----------


## Maria92

> This topic sort of came up once before... someone was lucid and they raped someone; I think... anyway, I still think it's wrong. Very wrong. The fact that you would take away someone's freewill in your lucid dream, means that you'd be willing to do the same thing in real life. And if the pedophile hadn't heard of lucid dreaming, they'd be raping real people. Just my opinion, but I think it is very sick. Rape is rape. Even the thought of rape is wrong. If you lucid dream with the intention of rape, then you are almost as bad as someone who does it in waking life.



>implying dream characters have free will

----------


## Daydreamer14

> >implying dream characters have free will



I don't mean DC's have freewill, I mean that, real people do, and if a pedophile is to rape a person in a dream, who's to say they won't in reality..?
It just seems wrong to me. :\

----------


## Maria92

> I don't mean DC's have freewill, I mean that, real people do, and if a pedophile is to rape a person in a dream, who's to say they won't in reality..?
> It just seems wrong to me. :\



Alright, so DC's don't have free will. No actual crime is being committed. Nothing with consequences. As opposed to real crime, which consists entirely of consequences. See you not the problem in your reasoning? Apples to oranges. There is no comparison.

----------


## Reclypso

You guys have to forget about this happening in real life, the question is, is it ok for them to act it out in a lucid or non lucid dream. It's not real, do you guys think it will increase his intent to do this in real life or suppress it? It probably varies from person to person, so there wont be a clear answer ever..

----------


## JussiKala

> You guys have to forget about this happening in real life, the question is, is it ok for them to act it out in a lucid or non lucid dream. It's not real, do you guys think it will increase his intent to do this in real life or suppress it? It probably varies from person to person, so there wont be a clear answer ever..



Check my earlier post. It does not matter if it increases the temptation to do  something IRL.  The choice of doing that or not IRL is still his. He has the right to do it in lucid dreams, regardless of whether it increases the temptation or not. It's his CHOICE to do that.  That choice should be his right, regardless of if it increases the temptation or not.  If it increases the temptation or not, it's still his choice to do it IRL if he decides to do it, and not yours. It is not our place to try and prevent  them from dreaming. From  IRL assault, yes.





> Bingo. Trying to justify otherwise is just trying to break other peoples rights. Who cares if the person is dreaming about it? "OOh, it might encourage him/her to act out the fantasies IRL!!!11 zomg!". What? It does not matter at all if he / she dreams about it or not here, it is not your place to decide which may or may not increase the temptation for the person. If it increases the temptation, it's still none of your business. It's that persons choice if he / she decides to go out and attack children. It is not the result of him / her dreaming about it. It's the result of the choice made by that person to attack that chlid, and that's that. There is a possibility that some motivation came out of dreaming about it, but it doesn't matter, the person still has a choice to make on whether or not to attack the children. 
> 
> It's actions, not thoughts/dreams, that matter.



Why would increasing the temptation be that bad? Why do you feel as if you should intervene even if it does? The people still have to make a concious choice to attack children. If they make that choice, they're bad people. If they don't, they can refrain themselves for doing so, even if they dream or not.

----------


## Maeni

> Now tell me why I should continue this discussion when you basically label people who claim they've been cured as liars.
> 
> As I said, there are those who claim it is possible, and those who claim otherwise. Maybe you tried, and it didn't work for YOU.



Actually, again you're right.
I was more referring to the time when people practically forced gay people to become normal, and that only lead to shame and sexual repression.
But you're right, people who tried on their own volition using whatever means they could, I am very willing to believe that they could do that. But I would still not encourage or discourage it. Perhaps if I was asked, I would suggest it as an option to try.
But I think it should be up to the pedophile himself. Whether he chooses to try and cure himself, or keep entertaining his fantasies in a dream makes no difference to anybody except himself, so there is none of the two options that he "should" use.





> Why can't you get outside of your box and grasp the fact that some might have had success, and aren't liars? The opinions of you and Mario92 are *facts*, and all other claims by other people are *opinions*. It seems that you, as well as Mario92 are just going around in circles:



 See above.





> Just like your opinion that it is NOT a disease, except these are mental health professionals. What are your qualifications?



Keep in mind that not many years ago, homosexuality was also regarded as a mental disorder. They changed their minds, they are human beings.
Also see my earlier post where I explain how the differences between mental disorder, disease and sexual orientation are inexistent. 





> It is only silly because you are sympathetic to them. I have never in my life seen someone try to discourage pedophiles from trying to change their ways. Until this discussion, that is.



Again, there is a difference between discouraging and not encouraging. Mario is not discouraging anything, he's just saying that there isn't anything the pedophile "should" do with his dreams.





> Unfortunately it is not that simple. The fact that he CAN'T control his urges makes him a dangerous person, and that alone should make you question whether using lucid dreaming this way is a good thing. But you just said "you don't care", therefore the discussion is useless. You also don't care if he has already molested children in the past. No comment really.



If he cannot control his urges, he is indeed a dangerous person. One would hope that the situation would be discovered and he would get help before it got out of hand and something bad happened. But what he does in his (lucid) dreams are completely irrelevant to that whole issue.





> Of course, everything I cite is dubious, says the pedophile.



For a statistic about pedophiles to be trustworthy, you need to have a large amount of randomly selected pedophiles to work with. The problem is that you cannot get a large amount of randomly selected pedophiles. You _have_ to pick all the ones that are on the sex offenders registry and in jail. That means that the statistics are indeed dubious. Not because we're pedophiles, but because the statistics don't have accurate test groups.
_(Besides, "scientists" tend to have a bad habit of confusing child molesters and pedophiles and making them into one group)_





> You are being dishonest, unlike Maeni, who said he wouldn't allow it. I mean really, letting a pedophile babysit your child just because he "seems a nice person"? This is unbelieveably stupid.



I probably wouldn't let anyone I only knew 1 detail about babysit my children anyways. It's a strange hypothetical situation anyways, you'll never have to choose a babysitter where you only know one thing about them, and that thing being that he is a pedophile.





> Your argument is basically this: I don't care whether he is a danger to society. Let him dream whatever he wants, it can't do any harm, no matter if he's already molested someone before, or is insane and/or can't control his urges. Having sex with children in lucid dreams is good for all pedophiles.



Hmm.. Actually I don't see anything wrong with that, I think you summed it up pretty well. I'm sorry, but if you're trying to set up his argument in a way that makes it sound stupid, then that's strange because I agree.
What he dreams doesn't have anything to do with what he does in real life. If he has molested someone before, is insane and/or can't control his urges, then sure that is a problem and should be dealt with appropriately. But his lucid dreams are still completely irrelevant.

EDIT:

*Spoiler* for _Slightly off-topic replies_: 







> It is completely normal to be attracted to someone who has hit puberty.  Why do you think there are obvious signs of puberty?  Because it shows they are ready to start having children, or fertilising eggs.
> Just because a person is grown older, doesn't mean their taste in people has changed to older people too.  It's perfectly normal.



Actually, being sexually attracted to people in early puberty is called hebephilia, and being attracted to people in late puberty is called ephebophilia.
To be a pedophile, you have to be attracted to children that *have not entered puberty.*

I agree though, hebephilia and ephebophilia are completely normal, for instinctive reasons.

Hebephilia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Ephebophilia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia





> I disagree. Pedo = child, phile = love of. Pedophile = one who loves children.
> 
> What most people are talking about are pedosexuals. Yes, semantics, but I think it's an important distinction to make.



<3
Well this is a completely different discussion, but I agree definitely. But remember that your semantics are not official. Officially, pedophile means a person who is sexually attracted to children, even though the actual meaning of the two words it consists of does not imply that. It is a flawed word indeed, but that's how it is at the moment. And officially, the word "pedosexual", does not exist. I wish it did, because it is much more objective and to the point than "pedophile" is.

----------


## Empedocles

> Actually, being sexually attracted to people in early puberty is called hebephilia, and being attracted to people in late puberty is called ephebophilia.
> To be a pedophile, you have to be attracted to children that *have not entered puberty.*
> 
> I agree though, hebephilia and ephebophilia is completely normal, for instinctive reasons.



Read my earlier post: http://www.dreamviews.com/f11/should...ml#post1671182

Then I am abnormal, and everyone in my family, and close friends. But then again, I can only speak for myself, and not for others.

----------


## Maeni

Of course you are abnormal.
Normality is a stupid concept, so why is that bothering you?

EDIT:

But! I also must add that of course I don't _know_ whether it is normal or not. I just know that in past times when people didn't live as long, it was important for people to have children as early as possible, which is why people are the most fertile in the teenage years. And which is also why people are attracted to teenagers.

----------


## Empedocles

> Of course you are abnormal.
> Normality is a stupid concept, so why is that bothering you?



I like women, not kids. The poster wanted to say that once a girl reaches puberty, it's perfectly normal to be attracted to her. It's bullshit.

----------


## Maeni

No, that is normal.
I don't think the majority of people will admit it, but instinctively we are wired to like people that show signs of being fertile. Teenagers are at the peak of fertility, and show clear signs of it.
People just wont admit it because it is looked down opun, and because we don't actually _need_ to be attracted to teenagers anymore, evolution have just not followed us yet.

----------


## Empedocles

> Only an idiot could ever believe that homosexuality can be cured, and if you're part of such a group, then you too are an idiot.
> 
> You can't DISPROVE that it CAN be cured the same way you can't DISPROVE Santa Clause, that DOES NOT mean you give credibility to the idiots that say homosexuality can be cured. Show me those sources you claim to have cured homosexuality and I'll show you their religious and/or pseudo-scientific connections.
> 
> I'm not on either side of these debate (besides clearly think pedophilia is mentally unstable), I am however against blind ignorance and downright stupidity, so don't fall into that camp.



It has nothing to do with disproving a negative as you claim, so in other words, the idiot here is you. Basically this is your reasoning:

Claim #1: Homosexuals cannot change their ways. Homosexual named X tried hard, and failed. Therefore it's impossible.
Claim #2: Homosexuals can change their ways. Homosexual named Y tried, and succeeded. Your conclusion: He is a liar, because if X failed, then this other guy couldn't have done it either.

So you, just like many others, simply dismiss anyone who says they turned straight as liars and frauds. How then, can we have an intelligent discussion?

----------


## Maeni

He said that he would show you their religious and/or pesudo-scientific connections.
I.e. he would provide reasons as to _why_ Y is a 'liar'.

----------


## Empedocles

> No, that is normal.
> I don't think the majority of people will admit it, but instinctively we are wired to like people that show signs of being fertile. Teenagers are at the peak of fertility, and show clear signs of it.
> People just wont admit it because it is looked down opun, and because we don't actually _need_ to be attracted to teenagers anymore, evolution have just not followed us yet.



Am I lying then? No, "young" doesn't equal "attractive" to me. You are basically saying I am being dishonest.

----------


## Maeni

What? No. I am sorry if it seems I implied that. I do believe that you are not attracted to young people.
I'm just saying that it is normal to be attracted to young people. Obviously, I cannot provide statistics to that because such a statistic would have to assume that nobody would lie about their attractions, but I think it is reasonable to believe that being attracted to at least 16-18 year olds is normal. _(Because they have all the traits that normal heterosexual attractions are based around; hour-glass shape, breasts, hip, etc)_

EDIT:

I just noticed that you did pretty much say outright that you can find 17 or 18 year olds attractive.




> And if a 17 or 18 year old looks many years younger than her real age, then to me personally, this is a turn off.



Doesn't that mean that if she does looks her age, you could find her attractive?

----------


## Hukif

Oh my, so surprised Jakob totally ignored the fail stats from the sources he cited, all info I took was from their very site and article, so it seems to me he isn't even reading what he cites.

----------


## Maeni

Yep, I'm still waiting for a reaction to posts: #101, #102, #105 and the rest of #114.

----------


## ClouD

For all the idiocy in this thread:

*Should fat people eat ice-cream in their dreams?*

----------


## Empedocles

> What? No. I am sorry if it seems I implied that. I do believe that you are not attracted to young people.
> I'm just saying that it is normal to be attracted to young people. Obviously, I cannot provide statistics to that because such a statistic would have to assume that nobody would lie about their attractions, but I think it is reasonable to believe that being attracted to at least 16-18 year olds is normal. _(Because they have all the traits that normal heterosexual attractions are based around; hour-glass shape, breasts, hip, etc)_



16-18 is different from 12-13. It might seem "only 3 years" older, but there is a difference.





> I just noticed that you did pretty much say outright that you can find 17 or 18 year olds attractive.
> 
> Doesn't that mean that if she does looks her age, you could find her attractive?



Yes, that's right. 17 or 18 is something else, as long as she looks her age. Any girl that has a "child-like" appearance is unattractive to me. If a girl is 14 but looks much older than her age(around 20), I would find her attractive, except that for moral reasons I wouldn't take advantage of such a person.

----------


## ClouD

Pseudo-righteous ignorance is so self-perpetuating! Too many people condemn what they don't understand, jump on the bandwagon lynching niggers, Jews and fags and call it happy.






> 16-18 is different from 12-13. It might seem "only 3 years" older, but there is a difference.



And you are the absolute judge of all things paedophilia. There's differences in opinion. Why the fuck should you care where someone wants to put their genitals?

----------


## Empedocles

> Yep, I'm still waiting for a reaction to posts: #101, #102, #105 and the rest of #114.



What do you want me to say, when you deny people who claim they were "cured" from homosexuality? What do you want me to say when you label any source that talk negatively about pedophiles as dubious? We are just going around in circles. Look here:





> How do you imagine an average pedophile victimizes children? Do you think they daily kidnap a new kid? The vast majority of child molestation cases happen in families, and I think most families don't have 244 children.



The word victimize can be applied in several different ways. You don't have to rape a child in order to victimize him. Touching a small girl inappropriately to get sexual satisfaction out of it is also victimization. One doesn't have to "kidnap" someone in order for that person to be victimized. Therefore it is perfectly reasonable to me that a pedophile can victimize over 200 children in his lifetime.

----------


## Empedocles

> Pseudo-righteous ignorance is so self-perpetuating! Too many people condemn what they don't understand, jump on the bandwagon lynching niggers, Jews and fags and call it happy.



I don't condemn anyone who doesn't wish to harm a person or force them to do something against their will. Your statement doesn't apply to me.

----------


## ClouD

> I don't condemn anyone who doesn't wish to harm a person or force them to do something against their will. Your statement doesn't apply to me.



You seemingly concur with condemnation of sexual preference. I've read through your posts. Paedophilia is not a problem, I do not care what other doctors have said because there are plenty more stupid people in white coats that disagree. These opinions are not evidence.

Do you have any credibility yourself, at all? Or are you a guy with an opinion, saying what is right or wrong and that everyone should listen to you. The only thing I truly disagree with is non-acceptance, and you're ripe of it.

----------


## SKA

> No, I think they should fuck real children.  *sigh*
> 
> 
> 
> It is completely normal to be attracted to someone who has hit puberty.  Why do you think there are obvious signs of puberty?  Because it shows they are ready to start having children, or fertilising eggs.
> 
> Just because a person is grown older, doesn't mean their taste in people has changed to older people too.  It's perfectly normal.
> 
> And no government agency or psychologist who is receiving funding is ever going to admit that pedophilia is normal.
> ...




I can only partially agree with that. Yes girls in puberty are attractive. Young = attractive. However there's a limit.
A young woman is very attractive, however a young girl I don't find sexually attractive at all. It's when they near and pass the 16-age that they become attractive.
Before that I find them very uninterresting and don't see them through the eyes of lust. In fact I can't.

If you feel lust for a 10 year old girl and you're over 20; you, sir, have a rather unhealthy mind.

----------


## Maeni

> 16-18 is different from 12-13. It might seem "only 3 years" older, but there is a difference.
> 
> Yes, that's right. 17 or 18 is something else, as long as she looks her age. Any girl that has a "child-like" appearance is unattractive to me. If a girl is 14 but looks much older than her age(around 20), I would find her attractive, except that for moral reasons I wouldn't take advantage of such a person.




Then we agree. That's what I said. It's normal to be attracted to people in puberty. 13 to 14 is hebephilia, and ~15 to ~19 is ephebophilia. I'm not sure about hebephilia, but I'm quite sure that ephebophilia is very normal.





> What do you want me to say, when you deny people who claim they were "cured" from homosexuality? What do you want me to say when you label any source that talk negatively about pedophiles as dubious? We are just going around in circles. Look here:







> But you're right, people who tried on their own volition using whatever means they could, I am very willing to believe that they could do that. But I would still not encourage or discourage it. Perhaps if I was asked, I would suggest it as an option to try.



And for the dubious sources part, I'm not just "labeling" them as dubious like a madman with a labeler, we have been giving your reasons (see post 101) why they're dubious. And to answer your questions, then I want you to either provide sources that are not dubious, just prove in some way or another that pedophiles should not use lucid dreams to live out their fantasies. You made the claim that they should not, and used flawed statistics and sources and just generally flawed arguments. So now you're either wrong or in search for better sources.





> The word victimize can be applied in several different ways. You don't have to rape a child in order to victimize him. Touching a small girl inappropriately to get sexual satisfaction out of it is also victimization. One doesn't have to "kidnap" someone in order for that person to be victimized. Therefore it is perfectly reasonable to me that a pedophile can victimize over 200 children in his lifetime.



It is reasonable that _a pedophile_ could do that. But that _the average pedophile_ does it is simply lunacy. Even including inappropriate touching, most child molesters will still only do it in the family. And again, families don't have 244 children.

----------


## Empedocles

> And you are the absolute judge of all things paedophilia. There's differences in opinion. Why the fuck should you care where someone wants to put their genitals?



Differences in opinion when it comes to fucking a child? Boy, you are one special kind of idiot. Yes, there are differences of opinion: a pedophilic child molester says it's OK and that he should be allowed to do it.

*I don't care where you put your genitals*, as long as it isn't rape, or the person you are putting it into is not a CHILD. The issue isn't your genitals, but whether you are harming people. You can put it in your mother if you'd like, and I'd have absolutely no problem with it. 

When you put it in a 10 year old girl, it is a different story. We are talking about sex with children for crying out loud. If someone put their genitals into your little girl's vagina, I'm pretty sure you'd be singing a different tune.

----------


## Empedocles

> You seemingly concur with condemnation of sexual preference. I've read through your posts.



You didn't read anything:





> I have nothing against homosexuals (for example) who have intercourse with consenting adults, as long as they do not try to force their lifestyle onto others. Pedophiles however, are not in the same category as homosexuals.



And by pedophiles I meant "active" ones, the ones that do have intercourse with children. How you can read that and say..





> Paedophilia is not a problem



..is beyond me. 

Having sex with pre-pubescent children, some even very young, some even going to contries such as Thailand to have sex with babies, and it is "not a problem."  ::?:

----------


## Hukif

lol, so you choose to answer everything but what I write, just so that you won't have to go and re-read your sources? Yup, says a lot about your credibility.

Not to mention only now you change pedophiles from anyone with sexual attraction towards children, to only those who have had sex with children and thus, cause harm. Oh well, at least we all know you are trying to save face at this point.

----------


## JamesLD

the next thing you know, the news is reporting "Lucid dreamers using their dreams to have sex with children"

giving us a bad name just like that damn jared loughner case

----------


## dakotahnok

*Hmm this really depends in my opinion. 

In my opinion i believe that there are different types of pedophiles. 1. are the people that are out to hurt the kids. 2. are just naturally attracted to kids, like how people are attracted to red heads. 3. Have an uncontrollable urge for children. and so on. 

Anyway if we were talking about the people have an uncontrollable urge for the children than i vote no. If they do stuff in the dream it might make the pedophile more likely to actually do the things in real life. I dont think that the video game thing applys because like jeff said a lucid dream is different than a video game. You have your emotions and thoughts in this world. Also everything seems 100% real. 

If we are talking about the person that just has an attraction to kids than I say fine. Because these people are probably smart enough to resist the real world temptation. And in dreams they cant hurt anybody,.*

----------


## dakotahnok

*





 Originally Posted by JamesLD


the next thing you know, the news is reporting "Lucid dreamers using their dreams to have sex with children"

giving us a bad name just like that damn jared loughner case



Well i think that most of the people who use lucid dreaming to have sex with children wont be telling many people about it.*

----------


## NightSpy2

> Well i think that most of the people who use lucid dreaming to have sex with children wont be telling many people about it.



Yea too true. I mean, if you had sex with a kid in your dream, would you go telling people about it? I think not.

----------


## Morte

I don't think paedophilles should be aloud to "live" at all.

----------


## Maria92

> I don't think *pedophiles* should be *allowed* to "live" at all.



 :Picard face palm:

----------


## JamesLD

> Yea too true. I mean, if you had sex with a kid in your dream, would you go telling people about it? I think not.



 no but once that person finally snaps and murders someone or sexually abuses a child and gets caught, then the police find his dream journal and read that hes been having sex with children in lucid dreams, the media would have a hay day with that

this is a totally random and unlikely scenario, im just saying

----------


## Reclypso

> Check my earlier post. It does not matter if it increases the temptation to do  something IRL.  The choice of doing that or not IRL is still his. He has the right to do it in lucid dreams, regardless of whether it increases the temptation or not. It's his CHOICE to do that.  That choice should be his right, regardless of if it increases the temptation or not.  If it increases the temptation or not, it's still his choice to do it IRL if he decides to do it, and not yours. It is not our place to try and prevent  them from dreaming. From  IRL assault, yes.




Should pedophiles use lucid dreaming to live out their fantasies?
This is the question being asked

It does matter if it increases the chance of doing something in real life. If a pedophile sees lucid dreaming as a suppressant to his not accepted actions, he/she will most likely try it. If it increased the temptations, even in a % of the people, we would be seeing more assaults on children and therefor be dealing with it. Pedophiles aren't usually thinking "How can I find a way to stop this from happening it's wrong" They probably are thinking closer on the lines of "Where can I find my next fix" Letting them live out their fantasies would be crazy since they are crazy and I don't wanna hear anything about normalcy they are CRAZY it's a mental disorder.

Lucid dreams are not real, yet we remember what we do in them. Is a pedophile benefiting from FEELING the sensations of having sex with a kid in his dream, and then waking up and still remembering it? The pedophile's therapists would shit a brick right now if we asked his patient to do the one thing they have been slowly steering clear of, even in a dream...

Also new excuse for Lucid dreaming Pedophiles when they get caught:

I did a reality check, I thought I was dreaming I would have never done it in reallll life.

Of course everything everyone says in this thread is theory since there are no studies :tongue2:

----------


## Maria92

> It does matter if it increases the chance of doing something in real life. If a pedophile sees lucid dreaming as a suppressant to his not accepted actions, he/she will most likely try it. If it increased the temptations, even in a % of the people, we would be seeing more assaults on children and therefor be dealing with it. Pedophiles aren't usually thinking "How can I find a way to stop this from happening it's wrong" They probably are thinking closer on the lines of "Where can I find my next fix" Letting them live out their fantasies would be crazy since they are crazy and I don't wanna hear anything about normalcy they are CRAZY it's a mental disorder.



This just makes so many bad assumptions. First, that it will increase temptation (or indeed, change it at all), second, that increased temptation will invariably lead to an increased probability of a pedophile molesting a child, third, that it is an addicting behavior that requires a "fix", fourth, that pedophiles are crazy. Furthermore, you refuse to listen to anyone who says contrary, so not only is it a false assumption, it is one you have convinced yourself is true, and therefore, cannot change your mind. 





> Lucid dreams are not real, yet we remember what we do in them. Is a pedophile benefiting from FEELING the sensations of having sex with a kid in his dream, and then waking up and still remembering it? The pedophile's therapists would shit a brick right now if we asked his patient to do the one thing they have been slowly steering clear of, even in a dream...



>Implying pedos all have therapists/are actively seeking treatment
How is it different from daydreaming? Whoop dee fucking doo, it's a feeling. That doesn't skew their perception of reality and make them throw caution to the wind. 





> I did a reality check, I thought I was dreaming I would have never done it in reallll life.



Yeah, because I'm sure that will stand up in a court of law. 





> Of course everything everyone says in this thread is theory since there are no studies



Not theory, hypothesis. If you want to go by the scientific method, and we have every reason to, you cannot assume that dreaming of something will make a person more likely to do it. That's a positive claim, and the burden of proof rests on the shoulders of the claimer. Until it is proven, we've no reason whatsoever to think it's true. Indeed, exactly the inverse might be equally likely. Maybe dreaming of it offers an out that is otherwise not available in reality.

----------


## Maeni

> Should pedophiles use lucid dreaming to live out their fantasies?
> This is the question being asked
> 
> It does matter if it increases the chance of doing something in real life. If a pedophile sees lucid dreaming as a suppressant to his not accepted actions, he/she will most likely try it. If it increased the temptations, even in a % of the people, we would be seeing more assaults on children and therefor be dealing with it.



Yes, we do have to deal with assaults on children, and we do that. We do that by discouraging the act of assaulting children, not by discouraging lucid dreaming.
There is probably a reason out there why some people assault children, and we should look for solutions to that, and deal with the problem simultaneously. But we should not discourage acts that may or may not _lead some people_ to do the act that is the actual problem.





> Pedophiles aren't usually thinking "How can I find a way to stop this from happening it's wrong" They probably are thinking closer on the lines of "Where can I find my next fix"



Well that was just slightly insulting.
You have no idea what pedophiles are "usually thinking". Hell, _I_ don't even know what pedophiles are usually thinking, and for crying out loud, I AM one.





> Letting them live out their fantasies would be crazy since they are crazy and I don't wanna hear anything about normalcy they are CRAZY it's a mental disorder.



Uh, are you saying that we should not let crazy people fantasize? And again, homosexuality was also a mental disorder not many years ago.





> Lucid dreams are not real, yet we remember what we do in them. *Is a pedophile benefiting from FEELING the sensations of having sex with a kid in his dream, and then waking up and still remembering it?* The pedophile's therapists would shit a brick right now if we asked his patient to do the one thing they have been slowly steering clear of, even in a dream...



Bolded part; I think so. Even if not, I don't see the harm. The rest;
You are assuming that therapists work in the same way. I'll just tell you that I have talked/worked with a total of 6 therapists (psychiatrists, psychologists, doctors), and none of them say the same things.

*Spoiler* for _Personal experiences_: 



2 of them thought that boycotting thoughts about children would limit my attraction to children; they would shit bricks if I did it in a lucid dream.
2 of them seemed convinced that my pedophilia was just a trait that I had, and that there was nothing to do about that, and would probably be happy if I told them that lucid dreaming was being used as an outlet.
The other two seemed convinced that I was going through a phase, had OCD (no idea why), or simply had a weird obsession with getting involved in obscure and taboo subjects. I am convinced that anything I told these two would promt them to prescribe me pills, because that's what they did after a short interview.



In short, the effect that it would have on some therapists is irrelevant.





> Also new excuse for Lucid dreaming Pedophiles when they get caught:
> I did a reality check, I thought I was dreaming I would have never done it in reallll life.



Somehow I don't think that's gonna work  :tongue2: 





> And by pedophiles I meant "active" ones, the ones that do have intercourse with children. How you can read that and say..



When talking about "active pedophiles", you should really use the word "child molesters", as it is way more direct. Active pedophiles imply that they are fit. You can say "pedophillic child molesters" if you really want to enhance that part, but "active pedophiles" is a bullshit term.

Now, I find it a bit odd that you still haven't answered to some large amounts of arguments in this thread.
You came back and said 1. it was useless because we deny first hand stories
And 2. We label all your sources as dubious. 

Now I have admitted that maybe it is possible to cure after all, so that's your first point off the list. And for the second, the posts that you have ignored are mostly posts that explain exactly why the sources are dubious.
That is how argumentation works, I believe. If you want to come back at us, you'd have to figure out a counter argument, either by showing us why your sources are not dubious, or by finding new ones that are not dubious, or by using reason instead of "experts".
If you cannot do that, then you've lost the argument.

And that's quite fair. What I think is rude is that you continue to argue against small sniplets of quotes, while ignoring all the posts that you no longer can argue against.
If you're out of the battle, you're out of the battle.

You are right that we were going around in circles. You provided sources, we pointed out the flaws in them, you provided similar sources. It's up to you to figure out what to say after that, so don't ask me what I want you to say.
I guess if you still want to ask for my opinion, a simple "Whoop, seems I was wrong." would suffice.

Of course, I'm not just assuming that you're out of the battle. But until you answer the posts that you have ignored, the discussion is sort of on hold. Maybe you want a few days, weeks or months to gather new, non-dubious information? Maybe you got it all ready right now? I just personally don't think we can keep going before those points have been answered.

v ::?: v

----------


## DeletePlease

Wtf is with this shitty thread being full of 6 pages of nonsense? OP asked if it was ok to *dream* about sexual intercourse with a minor. Fucking *dream*. I've read a bunch of dream journals on this site where people have beat, maimed, and even killed dream characters and no one has a problem with it. Are those people any more likely to commit mass homicide in real life just because they _dreamt_ it? No? Then why do you think it's any different when it comes to _dreaming_ about sex?

Also,





> niggers



Tee hee, you said the n-word. :x

----------


## Jay12341235

Either way, you can't stop someone from doing what they want in a lucid dream.

SO THIS THREAD IS JUST ANOTHER WAY TO WHACK OTHER PEOPLE WITH YOUR HUGE E-PENIS

----------


## Empedocles

Hello Maeni,

I will go point by point, so please correct me specifically where I am going wrong.

1.) Pedophiles are sexually attracted to children.
2.) Pedophiles have a strong desire to have sex, just like heterosexuals or homosexuals. 
3.) Pedophiles can relieve themselves sexually either by masturbating, or victimizing a child. 
4.) There is no other way they can relieve themselves sexually, since they are not attracted to adults.
5.) Some pedophiles can control themselves, and they would not victimize a child.
6.) Other pedophiles cannot control themselves, and they would victimize children, or have done so already.
7.) There are pedophiles that are in-between. They are unstable, try to restrain themselves, but whether they would victimize a child or not, is an open question.

Again, please correct me where I am going wrong above. Now here's my position in detail:

When I say that I am against someone using lucid dreaming to have sex with children, I am specifically talking those under point #7. "Why do you care?" you ask? I care, because it might increase the desire to do it in real life. If it does not, then I have no problem. If you claim it is impossible for it to increase the desire, then this is a dishonest answer. Furthermore, and this is important, I said lucid dreaming should first be used to attempt to cure pedophilia. If it really does not work, then again, I have nothing against pedophilic fantasies in dreams, as long as those acts remain only in the dream world.

Mario92 on the other hand claims that it is impossible to cure pedophilia, and calls everyone who says he's been cured a liar. This is pure bullshit. He can't go into someone else's mind and heart to see what happened and what didn't happened.

Mario92's position also seems to be the same as your position: It is impossible for lucid dreams to increase the desire of pedophiles to have sex with children in reality. Is this your position? Either way, I strongly disagree with that position. Some pedophiles might be able to use it as a positive thing, an outlet, while others will only be more tempted to try it in reality. Example:

*Pedophile A: "Wow this really feels good in a lucid dream, I don't need to do it in reality!"*

*Pedophile B: "Wow this really feels good in a lucid dream, I can't imagine how good it must feel like in reality!"*

Of course there can also be the following reaction:

*Pedophile C: "This doesn't feel good at all. Fuck dreams, I wanna do it in reality."*

Anyhow, I don't have a problem with A, only with B and C, and that is my position. To those who claim that scenario B is impossible, I think this is really dishonest and unrealistic.

Now I need to kindly remind you that I do have a life, and do not have the opportunity to reply to every sentence that has been posted within a day or two. Tell me Maeni exactly what you want me to respond to.

Jakob

----------


## Maria92

> When I say that I am against someone using lucid dreaming to have sex with children, I am specifically talking those under point #7. "Why do you care?" you ask? I care, because it might increase the desire to do it in real life. If it does not, then I have no problem. If you claim it is impossible for it to increase the desire, then this is a dishonest answer. Furthermore, and this is important, I said lucid dreaming should first be used to attempt to cure pedophilia. If it really does not work, then again, I have nothing against pedophilic fantasies in dreams, as long as those acts remain only in the dream world.



Once more, the burden of proof here is entirely on your shoulders. We've no reason to think it significantly increases the probability of it happening in real life in a significant number of people. Even so, why does it matter? Like Maeni(?) said, what counts is preventing the action itself, not some obscure maybe-minor-contributor to it. But go ahead, keep backpedaling. 





> Mario92 on the other hand claims that it is impossible to cure pedophilia, and calls everyone who says he's been cured a liar. This is pure bullshit. He can't go into someone else's mind and heart to see what happened and what didn't happened.



Hmm, where did I say this? And why would I go to their heart? All it does is pump blood around. Not a fun place to be. 





> Mario92's position also seems to be the same as your position: It is impossible for lucid dreams to increase the desire of pedophiles to have sex with children in reality. Is this your position? Either way, I strongly disagree with that position. Some pedophiles might be able to use it as a positive thing, an outlet, while others will only be more tempted to try it in reality. Example:



Burden of proof. We've no reason to think it actually increases desire until you submit valid evidence that it does. Furthermore, that evidence must be statistically significant, e.g. showing an increase that is outside any margin of error. So, a .3% increase would not be significant, but a 20% increase would be. To fully support your case, you must then show that this increase in desire to molest a child actually manifests itself in reality more frequently (again, with statistical significance). Only then can you say that one select group of people is somewhat prone to lucid dreaming increasing the odds of child molestation. Further, you're still attacking a contributor and not preventing the harmful act itself. 





> Anyhow, I don't have a problem with A, only with B and C, and that is my position. To those who claim that scenario B is impossible, I think this is really dishonest and unrealistic.



It's a long way to jump from "dreams are a bit of a disappointment" to "let's go molest children today." It requires a hell of a lot more than failed dreams to make that jump. Even then, are these people not entitled to dream as they see fit? 





> Now I need to kindly remind you that I do have a life, and do not have the opportunity to reply to every sentence that has been posted within a day or two. Tell me Maeni exactly what you want me to respond to.



Oh, that's convenient. 





> Jakob



Yes, we know who you are. Your name is right there next to your post for convenience. 

~Mario92 the Galactic Space Lord~

----------


## Empedocles

> Once more, the burden of proof here is entirely on your shoulders. We've no reason to think it significantly increases the probability of it happening in real life in a significant number of people. Even so, why does it matter? Like Maeni(?) said, what counts is preventing the action itself, not some obscure maybe-minor-contributor to it. But go ahead, keep backpedaling.



What are you rambling about? I never said I could prove that lucid dreaming *must* increase the desire. I said that it can happen with unstable individuals, and that if I could choose, I would choose that they not dream about fucking kids.





> Hmm, where did I say this? And why would I go to their heart? All it does is pump blood around. Not a fun place to be.



I was sure you implied it. Maybe it was Maeni then, but either way he admitted it would be dishonest to call those people liars. When I said heart, I didn't mean literally of course. I meant his soul, but perhaps being a pedophile you don't believe in a soul.





> Burden of proof. We've no reason to think it actually increases desire until you submit valid evidence that it does. Furthermore, that evidence must be statistically significant, e.g. showing an increase that is outside any margin of error. So, a .3% increase would not be significant, but a 20% increase would be. To fully support your case, you must then show that this increase in desire to molest a child actually manifests itself in reality more frequently (again, with statistical significance). Only then can you say that one select group of people is somewhat prone to lucid dreaming increasing the odds of child molestation. Further, you're still attacking a contributor and not preventing the harmful act itself.



We don't have access to such data. Your post is irrelevant since I never claimed it must increase desire, that's why I laid out these three scenarios above, which you completely ignored. 

So it may increase desire and lead to the actual act with some people, and in others it won't have that kind of negative effect. How is this a false statement?





> It's a long way to jump from "dreams are a bit of a disappointment" to "let's go molest children today." It requires a hell of a lot more than failed dreams to make that jump. Even then, are these people not entitled to dream as they see fit?



Nice sidestep. 

1.) You ignored scenario B, and jumped right onto C. Scenario B is the most important scenario, and I highlighted it red. How can you say B is not likely? Have you never had a dream about something and thought "i bet this would really feel awesome in reality?" Flying, for instance? How is sex with children in this case any different for a pedophile, if not even more tempting than all other things he dreams about? The pedophile wants to have sex badly. Some pedophiles will react like example A, and others like example B. If all pedophiles will react like example A, then go ahead, I encourage those pedophiles to take a sleeping pill and dream all day and all night about sex with kids. I do not give a shit.

2.) Again you make a straw man and keep attacking it. This is not a question of who is entitled to dream. You can dream about fucking your mother - I do not care about your dreams, as long as your dream activity does not influence your waking life actions which lead to harming other human beings. How likely is it to increase this activity in waking life? We don't know, because we don't have access to such data. We can only try to use our reasoning and form our individual opinions about it. Your opinion is that it is unlikely, my opinion is that it is likely. It is not the actual dream pedophilic activity I have a problem with, but one possible outcome resulting from this activity. Get it? Get it?

Didn't think so.





> Oh, that's convenient.



There goes your reasoning again. "I couldn't cure my pedophilia, so no one can." - "I don't have a life, so Jakob doesn't have one either."  ::lol::  It is 02:32 AM right now here in Germany. I had a busy day, and then I get to be 3 or 4 hours in the early morning on the computer. Posting on Dreamviews isn't my only computer activity, so sorry if I don't get to reply to each sentence from Maeni, Mario92, and other pedophiles and pedophilic sympathizers.





> Yes, we know who you are. Your name is right there next to your post for convenience.



It's a habit I have, to write Jakob at the end of some of my posts. Why does that bother you? You can write "Mario92 the Pedophile" and I wouldn't comment about it. At least you should be honest like Maeni and admit you actually are one.

----------


## Hukif

I like how you keep evading everything I say, and how you keep making big assumptions about mario and how you keep changing your initial position so that it will make you look like the victim here.

----------


## Maria92

> What are you rambling about? I never said I could prove that lucid dreaming *must* increase the desire. I said that it can happen with unstable individuals, and that if I could choose, I would choose that they not dream about fucking kids.



Exactly. Burden of proof. Show that it can happen in unstable individuals a significant amount of the time. And you still exhibit a desire to control the thoughts and dreams of others. 





> I was sure you implied it. Maybe it was Maeni then, but either way he admitted it would be dishonest to call those people liars. When I said heart, I didn't mean literally of course. I meant his soul, but perhaps being a pedophile you don't believe in a soul.



Where have I claimed to be a pedophile? As an atheist, I don't believe in a god, as a rational human being, I don't see any reason why a soul should exist. 





> We don't have access to such data. Your post is irrelevant since I never claimed it must increase desire, that's why I laid out these three scenarios above, which you completely ignored.



you claimed it could increase desire in unstable individuals. The only foreseeable reason this could be bad would be because it would lead to an increase in molestation cases. Prove it. Prove it increases desire AND increases the number of child molestation cases. 





> So it may increase desire and lead to the actual act with some people, and in others it won't have that kind of negative effect. How is this a false statement?



The "may increase sexual desire" bit. We've no reason to think it does. 





> 1.) You ignored scenario B, and jumped right onto C. Scenario B is the most important scenario, and I highlighted it red. How can you say B is not likely? Have you never had a dream about something and thought "i bet this would really feel awesome in reality?" Flying, for instance? How is sex with children in this case any different for a pedophile, if not even more tempting than all other things he dreams about? The pedophile wants to have sex badly. Some pedophiles will react like example A, and others like example B. If all pedophiles will react like example A, then go ahead, I encourage those pedophiles to take a sleeping pill and dream all day and all night about sex with kids. I do not give a shit.



I've never actually done that. Dreams have been entirely satisfactory in their own respects. Even if a pedophile does go "I wonder what this feels like in reality," it doesn't mean he's going to be any more likely to actually molest a child. It's a slippery slope fallacy. He's no more likely to molest a child than a person who dreams of sex with an adult will be more likely to go rape someone if they can't get a date. It doesn't happen. 





> 2.) Again you make a straw man and keep attacking it. This is not a question of who is entitled to dream. You can dream about fucking your mother - I do not care about your dreams, as long as your dream activity does not influence your waking life actions which lead to harming other human beings. How likely is it to increase this activity in waking life? We don't know, because we don't have access to such data. We can only try to use our reasoning and form our individual opinions about it. Your opinion is that it is unlikely, my opinion is that it is likely. It is not the actual dream pedophilic activity I have a problem with, but one possible outcome resulting from this activity. Get it? Get it?



This is the problem. You assume it will be more likely. That is a massive assumption that hasn't a leg to stand on. Might as well outlaw video games and movies and anything else that is even slightly offensive, lest it increase the chances one person somewhere will freak out and go looney. I mean, it sounds plausible, right? Playing a video game is basically immersing your mind in a way of thinking that makes you act like a killer. You're even rewarded for killing innocent people. You feel good for playing these games, which are stimulating and exciting. It's only natural that you'd seek an even better feeling by reenacting these things in real life. 

Seriously man, what the fuck?





> There goes your reasoning again. "I couldn't cure my pedophilia, so no one can." - "I don't have a life, so Jakob doesn't have one either."  It is 02:32 AM right now here in Germany. I had a busy day, and then I get to be 3 or 4 hours in the early morning on the computer. Posting on Dreamviews isn't my only computer activity, so sorry if I don't get to reply to each sentence from Maeni, Mario92, and other pedophiles and pedophilic sympathizers.



Bully for you. If you engage in a debate and continue to post, expect to come under fire for not responding or taking the time to read. 





> It's a habit I have, to write Jakob at the end of some of my posts. Why does that bother you? You can write "Mario92 the Pedophile" and I wouldn't comment about it. At least you should be honest like Maeni and admit you actually are one.



I can't tell if you're just trying to troll and are failing miserably, or you actually think I'm a pedophile.

----------


## Carera

As a mother, pedophiles for me are a big no-no. Sympathy for people who want to have sex with my child?  Is this a serious discussion?

To be honest I can't stand homosexuals either -- but they don't want to rape my child! Sure some of them do, but then those, too, are pedophiles after all.  No sympathy for them.  No warm feelings.  No hug.

They want to dream about children? Try doing something to my child, and I'll make you dream - permanently.

----------


## Hukif

You are confusing, pedophile is that which is sexually attracted to children, a child molester is that which engages into sexual intercouse with children/prepubescent teens. A child molester isn't forced to be pedophile, so yeah, big difference there.

----------


## Carera

There is no such thing as a "goody goody" pedophile, and there are no scenarios A B C. This discussion is a waste of time. A pedophile is someone who wants to have sex with a child! A LITTLE GIRL! A LITTLE BOY!

Please kids -- stay away!

Hukif, only a pedophile defends another pedophile.

----------


## Maria92

> There is no such thing as a "goody goody" pedophile, and there are no scenarios A B C. This discussion is a waste of time. A pedophile is someone who wants to have sex with a child! A LITTLE GIRL! A LITTLE BOY!
> 
> Please kids -- stay away!



Nope. Sexually attracted to kids. Most wouldn't think of actually molesting a child. Big difference. 





> Hukif, only a pedophile defends another pedophile.



Baseless assumption

----------


## Hukif

> There is no such thing as a "goody goody" pedophile, and there are no scenarios A B C. This discussion is a waste of time. A pedophile is someone who wants to have sex with a child! A LITTLE GIRL! A LITTLE BOY!
> 
> Please kids -- stay away!
> 
> Hukif, only a pedophile defends another pedophile.



And you know because you have personally meet all pedophiles in the world? You might feel strongly about this because you are a mother, I discussed this with mom not long ago and she felt the same, but really it is only the fear of their children what makes them think like that, try appraoching the topic differently, please.

I'm not a pedophile, I could say that only racists defend your line of thought, but that would be a baseless assumption and silly of me, please don't go accusing me of stuff if you don't know me.

----------


## Carera

> Nope. Sexually attracted to kids. Most wouldn't think of actually molesting a child. Big difference.



You can't be sexually attracted to kids without wanting to have sex with them.





> Baseless assumption



It is NOT baseless! Who would stand up for someone who wishes to sleep with kids except a person who shares such perverted fantasies? Only the dirty lawyers who are probably PEEEDOS themselves.

They ALL need to close their eyes permanently and leave this world. Here's a message to all PEEDOS: Mess with our kids, and we will go after you, one by one! We will do things to you so that you will wish you were never born.

No tolerance for pedophiles, and I am not ashamed to say it.

----------


## Hukif

Fine, let me give you something comparable to what you are saying "All pedophiles are sexually attracted to children, therefore they all would like to have sex with children, therefore all of them are dangerous" since this is some kind of closed kind of thought, I will extrapolate you and go from "All pedophiles will act this way" to extreme racism "All black people should be killed, all woman who have sex before marriage should be stoned to death, all kids must learn about sex only when they are engaging into it with their wife/husband, all who disagree with me should be tortured until they either agree or die" this is what you are doing, do you really think like that?

----------


## Carera

No - I am not racist.

A man who is sexually attracted to a little girl is a danger to her, without any doubt.

----------


## Hukif

See, I extrapolated the same way you do for pedophiles, but since you are not a racist you are either lying to yourself or trying to do it in order to protect your kids, I approach mothers differently though, so I will leave you at that, give it another thought when your kids are old enough.

----------


## Maria92

> You can't be sexually attracted to kids without wanting to have sex with them.



Sure you can. Pedophilia isn't just sexual attraction to kids, it is love of children, and doing what is best for them, which includes not molesting them. 





> It is NOT baseless! Who would stand up for someone who wishes to sleep with kids except a person who shares such perverted fantasies? Only the dirty lawyers who are probably PEEEDOS themselves.



A person's mind is their own sanctuary. They are free to think and feel as they wish. I support the freedoms of thought, speech, print, opinion, and expression, and hold them in the highest regards. So long as that person does not act -- and most do not -- there is no problem. There has never been a victim of thinking. 





> They ALL need to close their eyes permanently and leave this world. Here's a message to all PEEDOS: Mess with our kids, and we will go after you, one by one! We will do things to you so that you will wish you were never born.



You seem to assume that all pedophiles are automatically evil, that they have total control over their thoughts and sexual attractions, that they all wish to rape children. This is simply not true. In fact, this is the same thing people said about homosexuals not a decade ago, and some continue to spout this hateful crap. 





> No tolerance for pedophiles, and I am not ashamed to say it.



Congratulations, you just condemned several million innocent people to death. Their only crime was thinking in a way you did not like.

----------


## WhatIsX

> I can only partially agree with that. Yes girls in puberty are attractive. Young = attractive. However there's a limit.
> A young woman is very attractive, however a young girl I don't find sexually attractive at all. It's when they near and pass the 16-age that they become attractive.
> Before that I find them very uninterresting and don't see them through the eyes of lust. In fact I can't.
> 
> If you feel lust for a 10 year old girl and you're over 20; you, sir, have a rather unhealthy mind.



 Who are you to say what is unhealthy or healthy? Everyone's minds are different.

----------


## GMoney

> *What do you think? Should pedophiles use lucid dreaming to live out their fantasies?*



That's an interesting idea; one I've never thought of before.  Potentially, it could be a really good thing _if_ it's used in place of doing it in real life.  If they can get whatever kind of sick satisfaction they need for the day while dreaming, they can get what they want without harming anyone.  Harming dream characters instead of real people would be great, and society could really benefit from that.

However, you're running the risk of them becoming even more involved in it.  Whatever they manage to attain in their dreams could act as a gateway, causing them to do even more harm in their waking life.  This would be disastrous and actually would increase the crime rate, since they're thinking about it more often and even more tempted to do so.

----------


## DeletePlease

> *pile of poop*



What do have to say about people who dream about beating, maiming, and killing? It's very common among the members of this site, some even seem to enjoy it. Are these people likely to go out on a killing spree just because they dreamt of an imaginary scenario? Or what about people who dream about having sex with individuals who are already in a relationship? Are these people more likely to get it on with someone's boyfriend/girlfriend just because they dreamt of it? If not, what makes you think it'd be any different in regards to pedophilia? 





> You can write "Mario92 the Pedophile" and I wouldn't comment about it. At least you should be honest like Maeni and admit you actually are one.



So you think that he must be a pedophile himself just because he has enough sense to point out that there's no danger in dreams regarding sexual fantasies...? Well. I usually try to refrain from such unpleasantries but you've gone and pushed one too many buttons... In my humble opinion, you sir, are not very sound of mind; you are a doodoo head.







































































That is... um... if you don't mind me saying so...

----------


## Reclypso

> This just makes so many bad assumptions. First, that it will increase temptation (or indeed, change it at all), second, that increased temptation will invariably lead to an increased probability of a pedophile molesting a child, third, that it is an addicting behavior that requires a "fix", fourth, that pedophiles are crazy. Furthermore, you refuse to listen to anyone who says contrary, so not only is it a false assumption, it is one you have convinced yourself is true, and therefore, cannot change your mind. 
> 
> 
> 
> >Implying pedos all have therapists/are actively seeking treatment
> How is it different from daydreaming? Whoop dee fucking doo, it's a feeling. That doesn't skew their perception of reality and make them throw caution to the wind. 
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Your points hardly make any sense, who cares if they are assumptions they are good assumptions. A lot of pedophiles also have mental disorders associated with it, it's not considered a mental disorder itself but (in some peoples views) but it's often caused by past trauma in their life, and in cases people are just born with it. Just like most other mental disorders..

Day dreaming about touching a little boys dick would certainly increase his/her drive to do just that in real life, and just for having that day dream proves that you want to commit the act. Don't people for the most part day dream about something they want to do, or about what could happen if I did this. On the other side people do day dream about killing people and usually don't do it, still that just shows it's inside of you and anything is possible your mind can be warped at any minute.

I dream about my addictions, exposing an addict to an addiction isn't a good thing ever, unless you are doing a cognitive approach for anxiety or some OCD type issues..
Also mario we aren't talking about child loving people right now we are talking about child molesters so stop beating around the bush you are literally ridiculous, you would not want a Pedophile to come to your house and touch your kid (Or maybe you might since you are so out there) You can say all you want but if you were confronted with that situation you wouldn't be saying oh, they can just think how they want I don't mind

It's also funny how people change their views just because there's a Pedophile here on the forum responding, this thread should just be closed it's giving bad ideas to everyone. Or is everyone just a Pedophile here :X

Gavin: I dream about the casino I go the next day always, I'm addicted and don't want to dream about it. Why would someone post this thread if they didn't want help with their problem, they aren't looking for more ways to sex up some kids so they obviously know it's wrong..

----------


## Maria92

> Your points hardly make any sense, who cares if they are assumptions they are good assumptions. A lot of pedophiles also have mental disorders associated with it, it's not considered a mental disorder itself but (in some peoples views) but it's often caused by past trauma in their life, and in cases people are just born with it. Just like most other mental disorders..



They're terrible assumptions. Pedophiles come in a diverse range of types. You can't just generalize that dreaming about something will increase the temptation or lead to increased cases of molestation. Even those with past problems are fully capable of distinguishing fantasy from reality. 





> Day dreaming about touching a little boys dick would certainly increase his/her drive to do just that in real life, and just for having that day dream proves that you want to commit the act. Don't people for the most part day dream about something they want to do, or about what could happen if I did this. On the other side people do day dream about killing people and usually don't do it, still that just shows it's inside of you and anything is possible your mind can be warped at any minute.



Mind warped? Desire to do it in reality? All it shows is that the human mind can entertain fantasies it finds appealing. It speaks nothing of whether or not a person will actually carry out an act in reality (or if that act is even remotely possible). 





> I dream about my addictions, exposing an addict to an addiction isn't a good thing ever, unless you are doing a cognitive approach for anxiety or some OCD type issues..
> Also mario we aren't talking about child loving people right now we are talking about child molesters so stop beating around the bush you are literally ridiculous, you would not want a Pedophile to come to your house and touch your kid (Or maybe you might since you are so out there) You can say all you want but if you were confronted with that situation you wouldn't be saying oh, they can just think how they want I don't mind



Last I checked we were talking about pedophiles in general, not pedophilic child molesters. But that's nice, keep backpedaling and redefining your position. I'm sure you'll save face eventually. Even if someone is a child molester, they are free to dream as they see fit, and I would not have that any other way. 





> It's also funny how people change their views just because there's a Pedophile here on the forum responding, this thread should just be closed it's giving bad ideas to everyone. Or is everyone just a Pedophile here :X



Oh no, don't discuss it! People might get bad ideas. Let's also ban violent games and movies, they encourage "dark thoughts" too! We need conformity! Everyone think and feel the same way. We can't take any risks at all, especially tiny insignificant ones that affect an incredibly small segment of the population. 





> Gavin: I dream about the casino I go the next day always, I'm addicted and don't want to dream about it. Why would someone post this thread if they didn't want help with their problem, they aren't looking for more ways to sex up some kids so they obviously know it's wrong..



I don't know about you, but I'm here to defend innocent pedophiles from the constant onslaught they face at the hands of society and the ridiculous and ill-informed opinions of the people who comprise it. I don't care what a person thinks or dreams about. It is quite irrelevant. I gauge people based on their actions, and some of the posts here speak volumes on character, or the lack thereof.

----------


## Carzlebub

I actually would encourage pedophiles to do this. First of all I think the reason pedophiles go for children is because they get rejected by everybody else and so the only thing they can do is to turn to weak, powerless children. I guess they could go for animals too but then again thats a whole other level... I believe that all urges, whether it be an urge to have sex with a child, or the urge to eat a delicious cake, causes pressure on the mind. Obviously the person with this "pressure" would want to get their mind back to equilibrium, where they can feel at peace, so they would carry out their urge to relieve the pressure. If pedos are carrying out these urges in dreams where real world children aren't being harmed, then it sort of creates a safety valve for them to release their urges. I prefer they do it in their own mind than in the real world where children can get mentally scared from being sexually assaulted. The same goes for fat people. Perhaps if they eat a lot in their lucid dreams, they could trick their brains into thinking that they are a bit more satiated in waking life.

Of course, if there is an individual who doesn't understand the consequences of their actions, then I would not suggest this because they would assume that if they could get away with it in the dream world, they can do so as well in the waking world. Because, in the dream world, there are no consequences for your actions. You wake up and thats it.. Then again, I've seen Dateline NBC with Chris Hansen, and most of the pedos on that show are aware that what they are doing is wrong..so..ya...

And Mario, I agree with you 100% percent, I don't agree with Reclypso at all.

----------


## Reclypso

I never said that some were not innocent and I haven't changed my views, you are stuck in your own little brain thinking of ways to prove me wrong. I re write them so you can understand them. Which you still haven't gotten the point yet.  I also wrote that the people posting in this thread/ person who started this thread are looking for help which means they know it is wrong, which it is in all cases that have to deal with molestation. That is what we are talking about not child loving people lol that's the stupidest thing I've ever heard. We are writing about people who have sex with kids, not your grandma that pinches your cheeks and just wants to eat you up (Not literally because I know you'll take that literally) Also no one said anything about not letting them dream what they want, I was talking about using lucid dreaming as an aid to help them. It will NOT help them. Also I believe I said it is a mental disorder in some peoples views, you can be born with it, or a trauma can cause it, which is a broad range of different people I did not generalize. This isn't video games, real Pedophiles are reading this, would you let a kid with known mental problems play a game with murder in it if he was prone to murder? Like I said talk to a therapist if you need help, not us and then argue with us on how I the pedophile am right. All you are doing is giving them another excuse to do it.

Carzlebub the one thing you are missing is that having sex in a lucid dream doesn't make you have an orgasm, besides wet dreams. That pressure will just build up, and there ya go they are off to find a kid in real life to do it for REAL, because they are addicted. Also you supported what I wrote several times so you can't say that you don't agree with me at all.

That's the last I'm saying no point in arguing here, maybe we can move this to extended discussion for more intelligent conversation.

----------


## Maria92

> I never said that some were not innocent and I haven't changed my views, you are stuck in your own little brain thinking of ways to prove me wrong. I re write them so you can understand them. Which you still haven't gotten the point yet.



Sorry, I seem to be losing your point under an avalanche of crap. Do you, or do you not, think people should dream a specific way? Do you, or do you not, think people should think and feel a certain way? Do you, or do you not, condemn harmless actions that _may or may not_ *ever so slightly* increase the frequency or power of thoughts you label as "unhealthy," even in a vast minority of the population?





> I also wrote that the people posting in this thread/ person who started this thread are looking for help which means they know it is wrong, which it is in all cases that have to deal with molestation.



This is a very bold assumption to make. What do you base that on? The looking for help bit and the part that this thread applies only to child molesters?





> That is what we are talking about not child loving people lol that's the stupidest thing I've ever heard.



Maybe you aren't, but some people here sure as hell are. Or were. It has been the subject of discussion. The OP's use of "pedophile" cannot be inferred to mean only "pedophilic child molesters." that's an entirely separate and distinct group of individuals. 





> We are writing about people who have sex with kids, not your grandma that pinches your cheeks and just wants to eat you up (Not literally because I know you'll take that literally)



See above. 





> Also no one said anything about not letting them dream what they want, I was talking about using lucid dreaming as an aid to help them. It will NOT help them. Also I believe I said it is a mental disorder in some peoples views, you can be born with it, or a trauma can cause it, which is a broad range of different people I did not generalize.



>"It does matter if it increases the chance of doing something in real life. If a pedophile sees lucid dreaming as a suppressant to his not accepted actions, he/she will most likely try it. If it increased the temptations, even in a % of the people, we would be seeing more assaults on children and therefor be dealing with it. Pedophiles aren't usually thinking "How can I find a way to stop this from happening it's wrong" They probably are thinking closer on the lines of "Where can I find my next fix" Letting them live out their fantasies would be crazy since they are crazy and I don't wanna hear anything about normalcy they are CRAZY it's a mental disorder."

Right here. You generalize that all pedophiles are crazy, all pedophiles are looking for a new "fix", and that letting all pedophiles live out their fantasies (in their dreams) would be bad. you say nothing of that only applying to pedophilic child molesters, and even if that's what you meant, I still take issue with that last point. 





> This isn't video games, real Pedophiles are reading this, would you let a kid with known mental problems play a game with murder in it if he was prone to murder?



Yes, I would. Playing violent video games won't drive him to murder any more than playing Hello Kitty Island will. So, what, should we force people to pass a personality test from a therapist before letting them into a theater? Make sure they aren't emotionally disturbed before letting them watch The Terminator, lest someone go on a rampage?





> Like I said talk to a therapist if you need help, not us and then argue with us on how I the pedophile am right. All you are doing is giving them another excuse to do it, congrats you support them in their disgusting deeds



First off, I don't need help
Second, I have never stated that I am a pedophile. I see no reason to try and defend my sexual attraction, because no matter what I say, you'll automatically take it as sure evidence I am a pedophile. Whether that's vehement defense or brushing it off, your mind is set and nothing will change it. You can't change it. Far easier to ignore your claims. Now stop trolling, as I will not repeat this point. 
Third, I am in no way supporting the act of real child molestation.

----------


## Carzlebub

> I also wrote that the people posting in this thread/ person who started this thread are looking for help which means they know it is wrong, which it is in all cases that have to deal with molestation



To address this, I leave you this quote, "The narrower the mind, the broader the statement" I assume, that you assume too much in that statement you made about pedos viewing this thread. What if the person who created this thread is a therapist who is working to help pedos? Obviously, those in favor of letting the pedos do their dirty work in the dream world will be seen as pedos to those who oppose it. The logical thing to do when your argument fails is to attack the other persons character instead of their actual argument  which is what you are doing to Mario.... Secondly, this world will cease to evolve if more people think like you. In order for this world to evolve, we have to stop our morals from holding us back in our search for knowledge. In this particular instance, you don't even give the theory that "pedos can use lucid dreaming to stop molesting children in the real world," a chance because of your morals. How can you draw such a conclusion with just assumptions? Of course, my hypothesis is also an assumption to an extent but that is up to experiments to decide.... I leave you off with another quote, "Ordinary Morality is for Ordinary People."

Secondly, you claim 



> Carzlebub the one thing you are missing is that having sex in a lucid dream doesn't make you have an orgasm, besides wet dreams. That pressure will just build up, and there ya go they are off to find a kid in real life to do it for REAL, because they are addicted.



You are correct, sex in a dream usually doesn't make you have a physical orgasm in the physical world, but you do have one in the dream world, which is quite as vivid if not more than one in waking life. First of all a wet dream can be lucid....... Have you even ever experienced sex in a dream? if not, what gives you the authority to say such a false statement?

----------


## Irken

@ gavin lol the stare master and reference.

----------


## Reclypso

It makes no difference if you have a dream orgasm lol, when you get into reality you will have a boner and still be horny it hardly relives the temptations.

Mario: Playing devils advocate on this topic doesn't seem to be working for you, every time I make more sense you make less. You don't even try to reword your theories and that's why this discussion goes no where. And also just to make you sound less stupid in your future arguements the one and ONLY definition of pedophile on every dictionary site I looked on is this. 

pedophile - an adult who is sexually attracted to children

It doesn't say anything about molestation but anyone can see where an adult being sexually attracted to a child leads, and is certainly not the sweet love of a child like you infer. The word you are thinking of is pedophiliac which is a Greek word directly translating to loving children. Oh, and just to let you know the word Pedophile is classified under Psychiatry. Do you know what Psychiatry means? The practice or science of diagnosing and treating mental disorders.  Get your own definitions right before you question what this thread is about foo. And yes I did just go on a dictionary.com rampage

Title of the thread: Should pedophiles use lucid dreaming to live out their fantasies? No they should not. That's my final answer after my final answer after my final answer.

----------


## Maria92

> Mario: Playing devils advocate on this topic doesn't seem to be working for you, every time I make more sense you make less. You don't even try to reword your theories and that's why this discussion goes no where.



1. I have no desire to reword the painfully obvious. My entire stance is this:
-pedophiles are free to think and dream and feel however they wish. They ought not come under fire for doing any of these things. They are harmless activities. 
-When a pedophile molests a child, he or she becomes a child molester. That person, too, is free to think and dream and feel however he or she wishes, and ought not come under fire for doing any of those things. They are still harmless activities. Dealing with the harmful activities grounded in reality -- in this case, child molestation -- is a completely different and separate issue. You will not make any significant difference in child molestation cases by telling pedophiles and child molesters to think and feel and dream a certain way (indeed, as far as I'm concerned, doing that is offensive at best and immoral at worst). Even if you were able to hypothetically enforce that, it would be terribly immoral and still make no difference. 





> And also just to make you sound less stupid in your future arguements the one and ONLY definition of pedophile on every dictionary site I looked on is this. 
> 
> pedophile - an adult who is sexually attracted to children



You are correct.





> It doesn't say anything about molestation but anyone can see where an adult being sexually attracted to a child leads, and is certainly not the sweet love of a child like you infer.



Yes, assume they are all guilty. They're just time bombs waiting to explode. 
I can control my sexual attraction just fine, and so can a pedophile. 

Second, I believe I referred to the loving relationship once or twice, and applied it only to a certain group of pedophiles. 





> Oh, and just to let you know the word Pedophile is classified under Psychiatry. Do you know what Psychiatry means? The practice or science of diagnosing and treating mental disorders.  Get your own definitions right before you question what this thread is about foo. And yes I did just go on a dictionary.com rampage



This applies...how? Because I disagreed with certain psychiatrists that pedophilia is a mental disorder? That's an argument from authority. Just because someone in a position of power says it's right, doesn't mean it is. Much as was the case with homosexuality not so many years ago. 





> Title of the thread: Should pedophiles use lucid dreaming to live out their fantasies? No they should not. That's my final answer after my final answer after my final answer.



All pedophiles. The harmless ones, the child molesters, the innocent, the passively curious, all restricted in dreaming? That is how you'd run the world? My god, what a terrible violation of free will and privacy. Why do you care what goes on in the minds of people? Have you got one argument that uses rational thinking and isn't just emotional knee-jerk reflex and baseless assumption?

----------


## Morte

> 



How dare you say that. You have no idea of my own personal experiences you insenstive fuck.

----------


## Maria92

> How dare you say that. You have no idea of my own personal experiences you *insensitive* fuck.



How dare you condemn millions of innocent people to death, you intolerant fuck?

----------


## Morte

> How dare you condemn millions of innocent people to death, you intolerant fuck?



Innocent people?! They are anything but. Sure you can argue that some would victimize a child and others would not. But do you know why the others would not? 
Because they ain't got the fucking balls or the guts to even take their fanasties further. They are complete cowards. I have more respect for serial killers.

----------


## DeletePlease

> But do you know why the others would not? 
> Because they ain't got the fucking balls or the guts to even take their fanasties further. They are complete cowards. I have more respect for serial killers.



Don't take this as a personal attack (I apologize if you take offense) but that's _the_ dumbest thing I've read on all of DV. Trust me, I know dumb when I see it. I frequent Senseless Banter so when I call something dumb, you better beleive it's fucking stupid. =P

They don't carry out their fantasies because they know they'd be hurting someone. They don't _choose_ to be attracted to kids, they just are. It's the same way you're attracted to a certain gender, you didn't just wake up one day and make a conscious decision to be attracted to a certain sex. A pedophile is simply born with that attraction. 

The damaged few go out and prey on the youth the same way damaged individuals prey on adults (rapists) but that doesn't mean they all do. Many, if not most, keep themselves in check - the same way you do when you see a woman you are attracted to. 

Why is that so hard to understand for some of you?

----------


## MindGames

Perhaps it's because they have morals? If a person finds that they have a sexual attraction toward children, they might very well realize that it would not be right to violate them against their will, and would therefore refrain from doing so. Having self-control does not equate to being a coward. Perhaps you should set your personal problems aside in deciding the fate of an entire group of people, lest you turn into the next Hitler.

----------


## Dannon Oneironaut

Mario, I must say that you so eloquently said exactly what I have been thinking. Dreams are the one place where laws and rules don't ultimately exist, and that is as it should be, and be kept that way. It is private also, nobody is affected. Your dreams are nobody else's business, no matter what you dream about. If you molest a child, THAT is someone else's business. Nobody is a saint. Everybody has done something wrong or made a mistake or has broken a rule or a taboo but that doesn't mean that we aren't people who have the birthright to dream. You cannot persecute anybody for what they dream also because nobody is ALWAYS lucid, people are not always in control of what they dream. They dream about what they desire, what they want, or what they are afraid of. A pedophile probably already dreams of sex with children unlucidly. He already feels shame for his desires. 

People are very rigid with their ideas of sexual orientation. It is not wrong to have a desire, even if that desire is taboo. The only thing that is wrong is if someone acts on it and violates another's freewill. People don't have control over who they are attracted to. They can control their actions though. Someone should not be persecuted for what they have no control over. Someone should not be made even more ashamed of something they have no control over.

----------


## Maeni

Holy goat, so many new posts O_O

I'll come back to this later today~

----------


## Empedocles

> Innocent people?! They are anything but. Sure you can argue that some would victimize a child and others would not. But do you know why the others would not? 
> Because they ain't got the fucking balls or the guts to even take their fanasties further.



Great post, and I agree with you 100%. If they do it and get caught, they will go to jail. It has nothing to do with being a good person. Homosexuals feel sexual attraction towards other men, and they act upon it because it is legal for men to have sex with men. Pedophiles feel sextual attraction towards children, but the law does not allow them to do it. That's why many of them go to Asian countries to do it: Pedophiles 'hunt kids in poor Asian villages'

Mario92 wants to convince us that most pedophiles wouldn't have sex with children even if it were legal to do so.  ::lol::  ::lol::  ::lol::

----------


## Empedocles

> Do you, or do you not, think people should dream a specific way? Do you, or do you not, think people should think and feel a certain way?



Allow me to answer this question. No.

Ted Bundy should not think about murdering young women and feeling good about it. Mario92 should also not think about violating someone's child sexually.

----------


## Maeni

First batch, no particular order. I will edit this post.





> Your points hardly make any sense, who cares if they are assumptions they are good assumptions. A lot of pedophiles also have mental disorders associated with it, it's not considered a mental disorder itself but (in some peoples views) but it's often caused by past trauma in their life, and in cases people are just born with it. Just like most other mental disorders..



What, no.
_Assumption: A thing that is accepted as true or as certain to happen, without proof_
By making an assumption you run the risk of being wrong. If you make a 'good' assumption that seems realistic and likely, then there's a chance that you're right, but it's still an assumption, so you still run the risk of being wrong. That's why I care.
Furthermore, ironically right after that you give out another assumption. That it's often caused by trauma in their life is also an assumption. 





> Day dreaming about touching a little boys dick would certainly increase his/her drive to do just that in real life, and just for having that day dream proves that you want to commit the act. Don't people for the most part day dream about something they want to do, or about what could happen if I did this. On the other side people do day dream about killing people and usually don't do it, still that just shows it's inside of you and anything is possible your mind can be warped at any minute.



So you actually think that just because we all day dream about many fucked up things, we run the chance of being warped into insanity at any minute?
Well that's cool, bro, but then the idea that pedophillic thoughts should not be thought is not limited to just pedophilia. Going by your assumption, all 'unethical' thoughts should be limited so that we don't go insane from them.





> I dream about my addictions, exposing an addict to an addiction isn't a good thing ever, unless you are doing a cognitive approach for anxiety or some OCD type issues..
> Also mario we aren't talking about child loving people right now we are talking about child molesters so stop beating around the bush you are literally ridiculous, you would not want a Pedophile to come to your house and touch your kid (Or maybe you might since you are so out there) You can say all you want but if you were confronted with that situation you wouldn't be saying oh, they can just think how they want I don't mind



We are talking about pedophiles. Not child loving people nor child molesters. Pedophiles.
And he never said he wanted a pedophile to come to his house and touch his kid.





> It's also funny how people change their views just because there's a Pedophile here on the forum responding, this thread should just be closed it's giving bad ideas to everyone. Or is everyone just a Pedophile here :X



Yeah, don't let people listen to ideas that you don't agree with. Maybe I'm reading your post wrong but that looks like you're suggesting that censorship would be a good idea in this case?





> Gavin: I dream about the casino I go the next day always, I'm addicted and don't want to dream about it. Why would someone post this thread if they didn't want help with their problem, they aren't looking for more ways to sex up some kids so they obviously know it's wrong..



I don't understand this paragraph honestly, but your own personal experience cannot be applied to everyone else.

----------


## Carera

> Who are you to say what is unhealthy or healthy? Everyone's minds are different.



It is NOT healthy for a 7 year old girl to be penetrated by a pedophile creep!

People like you make me sick.

----------


## Maria92

> Mario92 wants to convince us that most pedophiles wouldn't have sex with children even if it were legal to do so.



Never have I said that, nor has it been my objective to do so. Since you apparently lack the ability to read more than three words at once before making baseless assumptions, I'll state my case again. 

vvvvvvvvvvv




> My entire stance is this:
> -pedophiles are free to think and dream and feel however they wish. They ought not come under fire for doing any of these things. They are harmless activities.
> -When a pedophile molests a child, he or she becomes a child molester. That person, too, is free to think and dream and feel however he or she wishes, and ought not come under fire for doing any of those things. They are still harmless activities. Dealing with the harmful activities grounded in reality -- in this case, child molestation -- is a completely different and separate issue. You will not make any significant difference in child molestation cases by telling pedophiles and child molesters to think and feel and dream a certain way (indeed, as far as I'm concerned, doing that is offensive at best and immoral at worst). Even if you were able to hypothetically enforce that, it would be terribly immoral and still make no significant difference.



^^^^^^^

Did you get all of that? Demonizing a person's use of lucid dreaming will accomplish nothing. It is not an effective preventative measure and only wastes time. If you want to stop child molestation cases, actually do something about it instead of targeting some inane aspect of decision making. Set up a neighborhood watch, increase education for the public and yourself, and stop dicking about on a forum discussing the potential minor side effects certain dreams may have on an incredibly specific segment of a massive minority of the population. For fuck's sake. 

As for pedophiles "hunting kids" in other countries, don't forget all the people attracted to adults who also go to other countries for sex, prostitution, sex slave trafficking, mail order brides, arranged marriages, all that fun stuff. But yet you seem to be a-okay with people using dreams to do all of those things. Just pedophiles? What massive hypocrisy.

----------


## Carera

Who is this Mario92? What is going on here?

----------


## Maria92

> Allow me to answer this question. No.
> 
> Ted Bundy should not think about murdering young women and feeling good about it. Mario92 should also not think about violating someone's child sexually.



At least you're consistent in your conquest for thought regulation and social engineering. What's it like to be a fascist? 





> It is NOT healthy for a 7 year old girl to be penetrated by a pedophile creep!
> 
> People like you make me sick.



How about only thinking about it but never acting or having the intention of acting on it?

----------

