Ephebephilia or possibly hebephilia rather than pedophilia, but the distinction is moot, because non-psychology litterate people mean all minors when they say pedophile.
I’m not defending anyone from anything. Your repeated, blatent and misguided attempts to mischaracterise what’s being said makes me think “He doth protest too much.”.
It’s the litteral terminology from the diagnostic manual from the APA. You may want to book an appointment.
I’m not suggesting you’re doing it specifically. I’m saying generally if you feel the need to make that distinction in your normal day to day life, you’re almost certainly a sexual predator.
Or any number of psychology related or adjacent professions, or just well read.
What is really really weird is that you seemingly equivocate ephebephilia and hebephilia as some lesser crime. They are all equally child abuse. There is no lesser crime being implied here. All punishable the same. All irreperably damaging to the victims.
You got some serious issues to work out. Imagine a courtroom where the lawyer present evidence of the accused stabbing someone, then you stand up in the gallery and scream accusing the lawyer of being a murderer because he said the accused stabbed the victim, rather than shot the victim. Ridiculous right? That’s what you’re doing.
Your saying generally that being correct, accurate and precise with the nature of the crime means the lawyers, judge, medical practitioners testifying and anyone with a loose awareness of standards and terminology are murderers in my analogy.
Did you know there is an entire section in wikipedia on various forms of chronophilia You better report the researchers, the writers of the articles, the publishers of textbooks, the entire psychology profession and anyone who clicked that link for sex crimes against children.
Ephebephilia or possibly hebephilia rather than pedophilia, but the distinction is moot, because non-psychology litterate people mean all minors when they say pedophile.
Can’t wait to try these words at the next Scrabble game.
Ephebophile (noun): A pedophile with a thesaurus.
Or a Psychology litterate with the DSM-V
This is one of those technical distinctions where if you’re making the distinction, you’re already on the wrong side of everything.
Psychology and precision in language using the diagnostic terminology of the DSM V is on the wrong side of everything?
No one is excusing or belittling anything. People who hurt children must fry.
Yeah, if you’re quoting the DSM V to defend yourself as technically not a pedophile, then yes you’ve crossed the rubicon of decency.
I’m not defending anyone from anything. Your repeated, blatent and misguided attempts to mischaracterise what’s being said makes me think “He doth protest too much.”.
It’s the litteral terminology from the diagnostic manual from the APA. You may want to book an appointment.
I’m not suggesting you’re doing it specifically. I’m saying generally if you feel the need to make that distinction in your normal day to day life, you’re almost certainly a sexual predator.
Or any number of psychology related or adjacent professions, or just well read.
What is really really weird is that you seemingly equivocate ephebephilia and hebephilia as some lesser crime. They are all equally child abuse. There is no lesser crime being implied here. All punishable the same. All irreperably damaging to the victims.
You got some serious issues to work out. Imagine a courtroom where the lawyer present evidence of the accused stabbing someone, then you stand up in the gallery and scream accusing the lawyer of being a murderer because he said the accused stabbed the victim, rather than shot the victim. Ridiculous right? That’s what you’re doing.
Your saying generally that being correct, accurate and precise with the nature of the crime means the lawyers, judge, medical practitioners testifying and anyone with a loose awareness of standards and terminology are murderers in my analogy.
Did you know there is an entire section in wikipedia on various forms of chronophilia You better report the researchers, the writers of the articles, the publishers of textbooks, the entire psychology profession and anyone who clicked that link for sex crimes against children.
Your bigotry is insane. Get help.
Just like the difference between a scientific theory and a layman’s theory!
Another technical aspect: all of the philias relate to attraction to something, rather than having sex with it.
One could have necrophilia and yet never have sex with a corpse or not have necrophilia and still have sex with a corpse.
Yep. I don’t care if he’s a pedophile, not, or something else entirely. He is a rapist and child sexual abuser.
And presumably one could have sex with a corpse yet not be attracted to it.
I’d say there’s nothing inherently wrong with any of these. It’s the child trafficking and child molestation that’s the issue.
deleted by creator