DSM 5: pedo not necessarily harmful; sexual orientation
1. Intro; 2. Cross-wired?; 3. Paradigm shift?; 4. Examples

DSM 5: pedo not necessarily harmful; sexual orientation
dgfsdsd
Unmoderated Member

Usergroup: Unmoderated Member
Joined: Nov 04, 2012

Total Topics: 1
Total Posts: 47

Last Blog:

#1 - Quote - Permalink
2 of 4 people found this post helpful
Posted Nov 4, 2012 - 4:02 PM:
Subject: DSM 5: pedo not necessarily harmful; sexual orientation
1.Intro

According to the rumor mill, DSM 5 is expected to acknowledge pedophilia is not necessarily harmful, depathologizing non-harmful pedophilia, and recognize pedophilia as a sexual orientation.

    "According to the new American psychiatric classification system, a person is only classified as a pedophile if that person acts on their sexual attraction to children - or at least suffers from the fact that they have this attraction," said Ponseti. "If he has this attraction without abusing a child, then we can call it a sexual orientation."

    haberler.com

One of the hopes and dreams of #OCCUPY was that a new means of production will affect a radical shift in political organization: specifically the end of marshaling labor with money and the start of a Linux economy that uses computers to organize labor, sort of like a non-dictatorial Project Cybersyn. In 399 BC, Socrates was executed for "corrupting the youth" and the old system of enculturation: pederasty, was replaced with a new system: pedagogy: education based in monetarism. Deleuzoguattarianism maintains that mental illness (Axis 1, Personality Disorders, Schizophrenia, Asperger's, Tourettes...) has always only been what was required of anyone to keep-up with the flow of capital. With the proliferation of coin money, the suppression of pederasty and it's replacement with salaried pedagogs followed. This process is still underway in the most remote areas, for example Central Asia, where currently in Afghanistan the culture of bachabaze boys is being stomped-out and the culture of universal education is arriving. However -- since the development of computers has in some ways obsoleted monetarism, the pedagogic culture that was based on coinage (and war) can't continue unaffected. Therefore, DSM 5 (evolved from US Army manuals), which is a reflection of current cultural trends, is beginning to depathologize pedophilia, due to underlying shifts in means of production.
______________________________________

2. Cross-wired?

    "There's a problem, not in the sex center, but in the network that all together is responsible for identifying what in the environment is a potentially sexual object. It's almost like there's a literal cross-wiring. Humans of course have many social instincts: they include the four-Fs, they include when you meet a person who's an alpha male you either run away or obey them, if you're a child there's natural instincts for learning, if you're a parent there's natural instincts for parenting, when you meet sexually interesting people that's a natural social sexual instinct. It's as if, as if -- this is a metaphor not a conclusion -- there is a cross-wiring, and when the person perceives the child, the brain, instead of triggering the nurturant instincts is triggering the sexual insticts: it's cross wired; at least that's a very helpful way to look at it that explains the data. So it looks like in pedophiles this white-matter is under-developed so the correct set of stimuli is not triggering the correct... I'll say correct... the correct instincts. That's what I found."

    James Cantor, "Brain Research and Pedophilia: What it Means for Assessment, Treatment, and Policy" (my transcript; from 0:35:00)

Consider where Cantor said, "...the correct... I'll say correct... the correct instincts." What if, it isn't the structure of the patriarchy that is correct, rather, the patriarchy is the one that is "cross-wired"?

Patriarchy is a form of egoic consciousness. That is, patriarchy is neurosis. Patriarchy is a conditioned system of rewards and punishments. It's the result of the discovery of animal training culture around 10,000 BC applied to ourselves. Another way of saying egoic consciousness is "life alienating communication", that's the expression Marshal Rosenberg uses in his system of "Non-Violent Communication". We can recognize egoic consciousness in ourselves when we identify with thoughts and then experience anger, anxiety, resentment, self-loathing, and so on. We can recognize it in others with a Voice Stress Analysis that detects activation of the Sympathetic Nervous System; we can also observe neurotic routines like Anxiety Disorders or Schizophrenia; we can identify triggered word choice: "but, always, continuously"; and we can also watch body language. Egoic consciousness is the system of Transactional Analysis Adult-Child games. Egoic consciousness is objective and observable. The opposite of egoic consciousness is Enlightenment, Depersonalization and Derealization, and how children, wild animals, and primitive humans live.

A long long time ago, before egoic consciousness and the patriarchy emerged, there was a different mode of living than the one we are familiar with today. The pre-tribe is a semi-mythical concept because all human societies on Earth today are patriarchies; egoic consciousness and the patriarchy didn't really start at 10,000 BC. Freud realized by Totem and Taboo that incest-taboo was a neuroticism; but he didn't study its origin point. Carlos Allones Pérez suggests that incest-taboo began at 500,000 BC: his reasoning is basically that Bonobos have no incest-taboo, but we do, so... when and why did it emerge? This is important because egoic consciousness, patriarchy and capitalism are all one thing. Monetarism definitely started before out-of-Africa since every culture on Earth used "size money" (religious icons). What Perez figured out, is that incest-taboo and money have something to do with each other. The market system and the family-unit system are somehow related, that relation is their mediation though the tribal central hoard, which becomes the temple, which becomes the banks. "No money, no honey". I guess we can trace the origins of lion-king patriarchy to Australopithecus (corroborated by max hominid sexual dimorphism at this time) when defenseless arboreal simians suddenly found themselves marooned on the Savannah and formed a brutal gang-land structure in order to survive. Just as the market system is not really a system of barter as is commonly believed, incest-taboo has little to do with gene deformity as is commonly believed. Pedophilia-taboo is to parent-child what adultery is to husband-wife: a monopoly on intimacy exchanges. Royal families tend to get chided with accusations of being incestuous because monarchism is exactly the lion-king mode of patriarchy that the incest-taboo & band-of-brothers system was meant to off-set. Incest is not as harmful as often imagined, it takes about 500 years of continuous close inbreeding just to get a slightly protruding chin (eg Hapsburgs). The notion that incest-taboo is the result of genetic deformity aversion is what Eric Berne called "Wooden Leg game", that is, looking for material explanations for what is emotional social dynamics; sort of like how hierarchy was justified similarly by Darwinian genetic fitness.

That's a big regression, but necessary to contextualize how sexual orientations are anti-produced from initial "polymorphous perversity"... While there never really was a time when humans lived before patriarchy, since the patriarchy is a neurosis, just like stable-vice in horses, it can never really be cured, but it can be relaxed. So horses can be put out to pasture, well fed, brushed and so on and they will stop exhibiting neuroticism; similarly, when a warm sunny millennium came, the patriarchy would relax and the Bonobo-eque form or society would reemerge. In patriarchy we see family-units, market system, and sexual-orientation with incest-taboo -- in insulated tropical societies we see alloparenting, communalism, and polysexuality. The difference is lack, or more usually, perceived lack. As Foucault, or Eckhart Tolle tell us, perceived lack is the drive-belt of discipline and punish societies/egoic consciousness.

Cantor had remarked that pedophiles have the nurturing part of the brain and the sexual part of the brain "cross-wired". In pre-tribalism, these are the same thing. I call it 'Barbarian Pederasty'. Before the family-unit and school system, learning happened my imitation, not by discipline. 'Barbarian Pederasty' was the system of enculturation for millions of years, it wasn't extinguished in Indo-European culture until 399 BC when Socrates was executed: at that point free education motivated by adult sexual attraction to juveniles was displaced by a market-based system of paid contracted pedagogues. In most mammals, the males are indifferent or hostile to the juveniles. What made humans human was male attraction to the juveniles. Pedophilia is actually the cause of humanity and civilization.

So... The reason why pedophilia becomes taboo is not because there is anything in-itself harmful about touch or intimacy between adults and children, that was going on for millions of years and still is in warm sunny places; why pedophilia is "wrong" is because of the way man, woman, and child and market economy, and family unit, and encuturation all fit together in contemporary patriarchy. Hope that makes some sense? I would add, some pedophiles might be called 'cross-cross-wired'; that is, they are lack produced: these pedophiles are living in a patriarchy and cannot get any touch or intimacy from adult females, these males perceive themselves as lacking in their need for touch, intimacy, recognition, and so on, and turn to kids. These pedophiles can be distinguished from the polysexuals because they are motivated by egoic or neurotic lack, not by what Marshal Rosenberg called "our natural desire to enrich the lives of those around us".
______________________________________

3. Paradigm shift?

A paradigm shift in attitudes toward pedophilia is happening now?

The old positions were entrenched and polarized; at one end were emotionally charged mob reactions like 'he should be castrated' or even 'he should be hung', while at the other end were observations such as those by academic Arne Frederiksen in Paedophilia, Science, and Self-deception: A Criticism of Sex Abuse Research that, "[v]oluntary sexual relations between children and adults do not cause any psychological harm other than the problems associated with discovery and intervention."

These days, a moderate middle-ground position is also emerging? For example, the organization B4U-ACT is reaching out to both mental health professionals and also minor-attracted persons with a message "that persons who are sexually attracted to children can be contributing members of their communities and that they deserve to be treated with respect. All clients should be treated in a caring, non-judgmental, and respectful manner. We see minor-attracted people as whole human beings, not as dangerous criminals or “deviants.”" And that "[s]ome minor-attracted people seek services to help them deal with issues that result from society’s negative reactions to their sexual feelings. Others seek assistance and support in finding satisfying lives and relationships while living within the law."

Similarly, articles have appeared recently on the German Zeit Online and English salon.com: "Der Getriebene" ["The Driven"] and "Meet pedophiles who mean well" presenting a moderate middle. The German article follows a pedophile "Jonas" and discusses a therapy center, Das Charité-Projekt, he attends; while the English article interviews "Devin and Edwards" about their project "Virtuous Pedophiles" (virped.org). Both of these ventures present a similar ideology, to quote virped, "We do not choose to be attracted to children, and we cannot make that attraction go away. But we can resist the temptation to abuse children sexually".

This image of the courageous yet tragic helpless, morose and chaste pedophile will be understandable to the general public who are also self-loathing and auto-repressed. From "Das Getriebene", "[h]e will not get any merit for it. He can not even expect a pat-on-the-back. No one must ever know of the fight, which he must wage, as long as he lives." (my trans) This new middle-ground image of pedophilia may sell well to the masses who believe they are passive in the creation of their desires and must endure themselves? In the long run, to paraphrase Eckhart Tolle, 'egoic consciousness is only an evolutionary stage': very few people have insight into that they first lay down and accept goals and values, and then after punish and reward themselves emotionally for failing or meeting those objectives. Unlikely will most pedophiles or therapists or the general public gain enlightenment in the Noble Truths and the nature of Upādāna shortly, therefore egoic consciousness and it's mode of expression: the patriarchy, with it's sexual orientations and pedophilia-taboo, will yet continue for some time. The apparent paradigm-shift happening away from emotionally charged mob reactions and toward a tolerant, if depressive and repressive, middle-ground as expressed by new organizations like B4U-ACT, Das Charité-Projekt, and "Virtuous Pedophiles" can be understood as representing a progressive next-stage of evolution in the flowering of human consciousness.
______________________________________

4. Examples

A
Lolita is a nasty fictional tale of patriarchal domination told from the perspective of the Man; Marguerite Duras's The Lover is a beautiful true story told from the girl's perspective.

B
"Many lay persons and professionals believe that child sexual abuse (CSA) causes intense harm, regardless of gender, pervasively in the general population. The authors examined this belief by reviewing 59 studies based on college samples. Meta-analyses revealed that students with CSA were, on average, slightly less well adjusted than controls. However, this poorer adjustment could not be attributed to CSA because family environment (FE) was consistently confounded with CSA, FE explained considerably more adjustment variance than CSA, and CSA-adjustment relations generally became nonsignificant when studies controlled for FE. Self-reported reactions to and effects from CSA indicated that negative effects were neither pervasive nor typically intense, and that men reacted much less negatively than women. The college data were completely consistent with data from national samples. Basic beliefs about CSA in the general population were not supported."

Rind B, Tromovitch P, Bauserman R., "A meta-analytic examination of assumed properties of child sexual abuse using college samples"

C
The recent study by Kilpatrick (1992) differs from other studies in that it includes no clinical or offender population and allows for respondents to give positive and neutral, as well as negative, responses to their childhood sexual experiences. The sample population was 501 Southern adult women who were asked to recall their childhood sexual experiences. Sixty-seven percent of the white respondents and 36 percent of the black respondents reported having sexual experiences as children. Kilpatrick found that the larger proportion of women (67%) remembered having participated voluntarily rather than involuntarily in sexual activity, and most reported having been active in initiating such activity, while a smaller proportion (33%) felt that they had in some way been pressured or forced. Thirty-eight percent of the women found their experiences to be pleasant, 37 percent neither pleasant nor unpleasant, and 25 percent found the experiences to be unpleasant. Sixty-eight percent reported having had overall positive responses to their sexual experiences..."

Floyd M. Martinson, The Sexual Life Of Children

D
"I had an experience with an adult man when I was hardly twelve years old but the circumstances were not such that I look back on them with horror. On the contrary, I have very fine memories of the first, though rather bizarre, acquaintance with sex, and what happened eight years ago has had no bad consequences. I have no trauma about it and have become neither oversexed nor frigid. All that happened was that I learned, at a very early age, how a man and girl can satisfy each other, and obtained practical sexual instruction by means of which I did not have to learn from a book what a naked man looks like, how he gets an erection, ejaculation, masturbation, and so on. In the circumstances that surrounded my case there was no question of rape. He was a darling, and as we say, "opportunity made the thief"[...] I look back on it now as an odd but fine first experience; in fact I liked it so much that, when I went home, I asked if I could come and "play Eva" (as he called it) again. [...] It certainly has done me no harm."

Tom O'Carroll, Paedophilia: The Radical Case

E
"When I was a child I experienced an ongoing incestuous relationship that seemed to me to be caring and beneficial in nature. There were love and healthy self-actualization in what I perceived to be a safe environment. Suddenly one day I discerned from playground talk at school that what I was doing might be "bad". Fearing that I might, indeed, be a "bad" person, I went to my mother for reassurance. The ensuing traumatic incidents of that day inaugurated a 30-year period of psychological and emotional dysfunction that reduced family communication to mere utilitarian process and established severe limits on my subsequent developmental journey."

Nelson, J. A. (1982). "The impact of incest: Factors in self-evaluation," in L. L. Constantine & F. M. Martinson (Eds.), Children and Sex: New Findings, New Perspectives

F
"For the children of the Trobrianders there is no sexual repression and no sexual mystery. Their sexual life develops naturally, freely and without restraint through all periods of life, with complete satisfaction. ... Trobriander society in this third decade of our century knows no sexual perversions, no functional mental illnes, no psychoneurosis, no sex murders. ... Sadism, destructiveness and theft are equally absent in Trobriander culture. ... And these are always cultures with a positive attitude towards sex."

Malinowski, The Sexual Life of the Savages

Edited by dgfsdsd on Nov 7, 2012 - 9:57 AM
Fallen Hawthorn
Defeated Skeptic

Usergroup: Members
Joined: May 24, 2011
Location: British Columbia, Canada

Total Topics: 18
Total Posts: 278
#2 - Quote - Permalink
Posted Nov 4, 2012 - 4:18 PM:

dgfsdsd wrote:
"According to the new American psychiatric classification system, a person is only classified as a pedophile if that person acts on their sexual attraction to children - or at least suffers from the fact that they have this attraction," said Ponseti. "If he has this attraction without abusing a child, then we can call it a sexual orientation."


dfsdsd wrote:
According to the rumor mill, DSM 5 is expected to acknowledge pedophilia is not necessarily harmful, depathologizing non-harmful pedophilia, and recognize pedophilia as a sexual orientation.


I have no idea what you are arguing, and it is all really quite long with a shit tonne of quotes, but it is the case that pedophilia is much like any other sexual orientation except for the fact that children can't be expected to understand and consent in the same manner as adults and older teenagers. It seems like all the DSM is stating is that it is no harmful for one to recognize they have an attraction to children so long as they do not do anything to harm children (whether by intention or circumstance). Seems fair enough.
dgfsdsd
Unmoderated Member

Usergroup: Unmoderated Member
Joined: Nov 04, 2012

Total Topics: 1
Total Posts: 47

Last Blog:

#3 - Quote - Permalink
0 of 1 people found this post helpful
Posted Nov 4, 2012 - 4:35 PM:

Fallen Hawthorn wrote:
I have no idea what you are arguing, and it is all really quite long with a shit tonne of quotes, but it is the case that pedophilia is much like any other sexual orientation

I'm not a DSM insider so I don't know, but my acquaintance claims that DSM IV made this change already, then mass public reacted, resulting in DSM IV-TR; so DSM 5 is now as it was in 1994?

is except for the fact that children can't be expected to understand and consent in the same manner as adults and older teenagers. It seems like all the DSM is stating is that it is no harmful for one to recognize they have an attraction to children so long as they do not do anything to harm children (whether by intention or circumstance). Seems fair enough.

Foucault's response in interview was that, "[t]his notion of consent is a trap". That's because contractualism is something that happens on the level of egoic consciousness: the capitalopatriarchy; whereas, what is true is happening at the level of the "desert of the real" (Baudrillard). Foucault gave this interview in 1978, in the context of the 1977 petition to repeal Age-of-Consent laws from the French penal code; among others, that petition was signed by Foucault, Jacques Derrida, Louis Althusser, Jean-Paul Sartre, Simone de Beauvoir and Roland Barthes. A similar paradigm shift as was happening in 70's France seems to be occurring today.

    "This notion of consent is a trap, in any case. What is sure is that the legal form of an intersexual consent is nonsense. ... When we say that children are ‘consenting’ in these cases, all we intend to say is this: in any case, there was no violence, or organized manipulation in order to wrench out of them affective or erotic relations. ... We took great care to speak exclusively of an indecent act not involving violence and incitement of a minor to commit an indecent act. We were extremely careful not to touch, in any way, on the problem of rape, which is totally different.”

    - Michel Foucault, “Sexual Morality and the Law”, Semiotext(e)


swstephe
PF Addict
Avatar

Usergroup: Moderators
Joined: Apr 20, 2006
Location: San Jose, California

Total Topics: 39
Total Posts: 1424
#4 - Quote - Permalink
9 of 9 people found this post helpful
Posted Nov 13, 2012 - 1:34 PM:

dgfsdsd wrote:

Lolita is a nasty fictional tale of patriarchal domination told from the perspective of the Man; Marguerite Duras's The Lover is a beautiful true story told from the girl's perspective.


You can make anything sound good in fiction. That doesn't mean it is true.

dgfsdsd wrote:

B
"Many lay persons and professionals believe that child sexual abuse (CSA) causes intense harm, regardless of gender, pervasively in the general population. The authors examined this belief by reviewing 59 studies based on college samples. Meta-analyses revealed that students with CSA were, on average, slightly less well adjusted than controls. However, this poorer adjustment could not be attributed to CSA because family environment (FE) was consistently confounded with CSA, FE explained considerably more adjustment variance than CSA, and CSA-adjustment relations generally became nonsignificant when studies controlled for FE. Self-reported reactions to and effects from CSA indicated that negative effects were neither pervasive nor typically intense, and that men reacted much less negatively than women. The college data were completely consistent with data from national samples. Basic beliefs about CSA in the general population were not supported."

Rind B, Tromovitch P, Bauserman R., "A meta-analytic examination of assumed properties of child sexual abuse using college samples"


College is a horribly biased sampling. You have eliminated everyone who committed suicide, ended up with physical or mental trauma, dropped out of school, ended up in prostitution or addicted to alcohol and drugs, (all at rates far higher than those without abuse). These are all people who were successful, intelligent and wealthy enough to enter into college life. They also have a disproportionate representation of supportive family backgrounds. So such studies only prove that people who get into college aren't psychologically damaged.

dgfsdsd wrote:

C
The recent study by Kilpatrick (1992) differs from other studies in that it includes no clinical or offender population and allows for respondents to give positive and neutral, as well as negative, responses to their childhood sexual experiences. The sample population was 501 Southern adult women who were asked to recall their childhood sexual experiences. Sixty-seven percent of the white respondents and 36 percent of the black respondents reported having sexual experiences as children. Kilpatrick found that the larger proportion of women (67%) remembered having participated voluntarily rather than involuntarily in sexual activity, and most reported having been active in initiating such activity, while a smaller proportion (33%) felt that they had in some way been pressured or forced. Thirty-eight percent of the women found their experiences to be pleasant, 37 percent neither pleasant nor unpleasant, and 25 percent found the experiences to be unpleasant. Sixty-eight percent reported having had overall positive responses to their sexual experiences..."

Floyd M. Martinson, The Sexual Life Of Children


From the same book:

From source Floyd M. Martinson:
Despite these findings of little reported harm or abuse from their childhood sexual experiences, Kilpatrick (1992) warned that under no circumstance should her findings be used to sanction child-adult sexual relations. Kilpatrick agreed with Finkelhor (1979) that a child is not in a position to give informed consent, and such relationships involve unequal power on the part of the participants. Kilpatrick concluded that in child-adult sexual activity there is psychological, if not physical, coercion and it should be treated as such.


What you omitted was that these positive sexual experiences were with children their own age, in fact, no more than 5 years older. So, while it supports experimentation, it in no way supports pedophilia or child-adult relationships as positive or healthy.


dgfsdsd wrote:

D
"I had an experience with an adult man when I was hardly twelve years old but the circumstances were not such that I look back on them with horror. On the contrary, I have very fine memories of the first, though rather bizarre, acquaintance with sex, and what happened eight years ago has had no bad consequences. I have no trauma about it and have become neither oversexed nor frigid. All that happened was that I learned, at a very early age, how a man and girl can satisfy each other, and obtained practical sexual instruction by means of which I did not have to learn from a book what a naked man looks like, how he gets an erection, ejaculation, masturbation, and so on. In the circumstances that surrounded my case there was no question of rape. He was a darling, and as we say, "opportunity made the thief"[...] I look back on it now as an odd but fine first experience; in fact I liked it so much that, when I went home, I asked if I could come and "play Eva" (as he called it) again. [...] It certainly has done me no harm."

Tom O'Carroll, Paedophilia: The Radical Case


This could be considered circular reasoning. He doesn't consider his experience of being sexually abused by a pedophile harmful, in that it didn't cause him any harm -- except that he became a rather renowned pedophile himself, (including arrest for distribution of child pornography). This is even more biased, as it is the account of just one individual and this is only anecdotal evidence. He hasn't explained why there is such a strong correlation between mental illness, suicide, alcohol and drug addiction and sexual abuse.

dgfsdsd wrote:

E
"When I was a child I experienced an ongoing incestuous relationship that seemed to me to be caring and beneficial in nature. There were love and healthy self-actualization in what I perceived to be a safe environment. Suddenly one day I discerned from playground talk at school that what I was doing might be "bad". Fearing that I might, indeed, be a "bad" person, I went to my mother for reassurance. The ensuing traumatic incidents of that day inaugurated a 30-year period of psychological and emotional dysfunction that reduced family communication to mere utilitarian process and established severe limits on my subsequent developmental journey."

Nelson, J. A. (1982). "The impact of incest: Factors in self-evaluation," in L. L. Constantine & F. M. Martinson (Eds.), Children and Sex: New Findings, New Perspectives


Another anecdotal assertion from a controversial figure. But while Dr. Joan Nelson is saying the harm is more from public guilt than direct harm ... it is still harm. If a parent forced their kids to walk around naked and act like animals, we would still accuse the parent of child abuse. Not because of direct harm, but because of emotional and psychological harm of making children break societal taboos.

dgfsdsd wrote:

F
"For the children of the Trobrianders there is no sexual repression and no sexual mystery. Their sexual life develops naturally, freely and without restraint through all periods of life, with complete satisfaction. ... Trobriander society in this third decade of our century knows no sexual perversions, no functional mental illnes, no psychoneurosis, no sex murders. ... Sadism, destructiveness and theft are equally absent in Trobriander culture. ... And these are always cultures with a positive attitude towards sex."

Malinowski, The Sexual Life of the Savages


You are talking about the Trobriand Islands, off the coast of Papua New Guinea. I lived not to far from there for a while and got to spend some time in the jungle. Sounds like the quotation is from someone suffering "noble savage syndrome". The author mentions "this third decade of our century", to mention that he is actually comparing 1930's Papua to 1930's western life. There certainly is "sexual repression" as incest and adult-child sexual relationships are still taboo. This might not be so apparent to outsiders because adulthood is considered to begin much earlier. There are actually more rules in their society than there are in ours. One story I've heard from Kiriwira island is that before the missionaries came, they believed that sex during nursing would be fatal. The missionaries taught them it was nonsense, and they had a population explosion, (women nurse until the child is 3 years old). There was ritual cannibalism and head-hunting practiced in that area, (so much for sadism). Their lives are constant conflicts about destruction, theft and adultery. Most, but not all, are resolved peacefully by elders. They believe in witchcraft and will often single out individuals for practicing bad magic or possession, (so much for mental illness). Even though the society is mostly matriarchal, that doesn't prevent occasional rape and spousal abuse. It is only a matter of social views on what constitutes consent and appropriate physical violence.
Mars Man
PF Addict
Avatar

Usergroup: Sponsors
Joined: Sep 27, 2006
Location: Matsumoto, Japan

Total Topics: 63
Total Posts: 1390
#5 - Quote - Permalink
Posted Nov 13, 2012 - 5:21 PM:

Please do forgive me, for what I will post here and now (and which will far more likely be the only-ever post for this particular thread) will be quite short. Additionally, because I simply do not have the time to spend, I will probably not be able to get back here. I do wish, however, to simply put forward a comment. I apologize for not being able to get involved, and hope all involved will allow me this one 'shooting-from-the-hip' of a post.

From what I have seen regarding the 'ever-changing' DSM, and the case studies I have read over--as well as the sexology input and neuroscientific input in general--we can find room for a domain of correctness in what you have seemingly been focusing on, dfsdsd san. (Even from the other thread about the legal change in Iran, was it?) That margin, or domain, or however a person may wish to label that small area on the bell-curve of the continuum of relatively involved matters, is comparatively quite small, I would always wish to stress.

A few of the terms which you make use of (for example 'egoic consciousness'), while I think I do understand their application (or intended appliation), I find, actually, not so good. I think this may possibly be due to a possible psychiatric handling, in absence of neuroscientific-based findings--and thus with the properly balanced adjustments. In my eyes, and informed understanding, that puts those questionable terms in a rather non-performing category.

In summary, there is some degree of truth in your presentation. That degree does not appear, over all cases and studies and arguments, to be large enough to suggest any greater, far-reaching public paradigm shifts just yet. A few terms used in analyzing the data, are actually non-performers, and thus work to weaken the arguments they are used in. Further research and investigation, longitudal studies and overviews, are yet to be suggested before a more secure conclusion can be reached.
Ginger17
Forum Veteran

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Sep 04, 2012

Total Topics: 51
Total Posts: 662
#6 - Quote - Permalink
1 of 4 people found this post helpful
Posted Nov 13, 2012 - 5:47 PM:


What is this DSM-V; an updated edition of the 14th century diagnostic manual, Mallius Maleficarum?

FrankLeeSeaux
Pronounced "frankly so"

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Mar 21, 2012
Location: In the Ether

Total Topics: 29
Total Posts: 2286
#7 - Quote - Permalink
1 of 1 people found this post helpful
Posted Nov 13, 2012 - 10:36 PM:

Mars Man wrote:
Please do forgive me, for what I will post here and now (and which will far more likely be the only-ever post for this particular thread) will be quite short. Additionally, because I simply do not have the time to spend, I will probably not be able to get back here. I do wish, however, to simply put forward a comment. I apologize for not being able to get involved, and hope all involved will allow me this one 'shooting-from-the-hip' of a post.

From what I have seen regarding the 'ever-changing' DSM, and the case studies I have read over--as well as the sexology input and neuroscientific input in general--we can find room for a domain of correctness in what you have seemingly been focusing on, dfsdsd san. (Even from the other thread about the legal change in Iran, was it?) That margin, or domain, or however a person may wish to label that small area on the bell-curve of the continuum of relatively involved matters, is comparatively quite small, I would always wish to stress.

A few of the terms which you make use of (for example 'egoic consciousness'), while I think I do understand their application (or intended appliation), I find, actually, not so good. I think this may possibly be due to a possible psychiatric handling, in absence of neuroscientific-based findings--and thus with the properly balanced adjustments. In my eyes, and informed understanding, that puts those questionable terms in a rather non-performing category.

In summary, there is some degree of truth in your presentation. That degree does not appear, over all cases and studies and arguments, to be large enough to suggest any greater, far-reaching public paradigm shifts just yet. A few terms used in analyzing the data, are actually non-performers, and thus work to weaken the arguments they are used in. Further research and investigation, longitudal studies and overviews, are yet to be suggested before a more secure conclusion can be reached.


Agreed. Also, his rather liberal application of those terms toward/about, his interlocutors seems a bit hasty. Indicating that he is not qualified to levy such judgments. I've known a few psychiatrists, and psychologists, and none of them were prone to offering such free, unsolicited, or terse, pronouncements of character.

Edited by FrankLeeSeaux on Nov 13, 2012 - 11:06 PM
dgfsdsd
Unmoderated Member

Usergroup: Unmoderated Member
Joined: Nov 04, 2012

Total Topics: 1
Total Posts: 47

Last Blog:

#8 - Quote - Permalink
Posted Nov 13, 2012 - 11:02 PM:

Mars Man wrote:
That margin, or domain, or however a person may wish to label that small area on the bell-curve of the continuum of relatively involved matters, is comparatively quite small, I would always wish to stress. ... In summary, there is some degree of truth in your presentation.

Sure; it's not common in the present Mr.Green/Mr.Gold* set up, but there are every now and then true beautiful loving sexually expressive intergenerational relationships happening.


* Guy Ritche's Revolver, 2005


PS; I'm intending "egoic consciousness" in the sense Tolle uses it: the Advaita or Zen sense.

A few terms used in analyzing the data, are actually non-performers

Yeah. I kinda had to make up some words because there isn't much of a vocabulary available for talking about this subject in the way I'm wanting to. Someone might guess that the OP is coming right out of left-field; but no. I lifted the concept that pedophilia-taboo is a bi-product of maintenance of family-unit and market structure from Eugene Holland's Schizoanalysis and Carlos Allones Pérez's stuff on incest and capitalism. I'm not aware of that much other work integrating economy, the punitive state, and sexual structure? If someone else has a wholistic theory about the memetic evolution of the sexual-taboos, I'd love to hear.

That degree does not appear, over all cases and studies and arguments, to be large enough to suggest any greater, far-reaching public paradigm shifts just yet.

Oh sure. Maintaining the family-unit and market system is gonna continue to leave a lot of kids in anguish and lots of adults in cement cages and chains for many many years to come. After groups like NAMBLA got smashed to smithereens during the conservative eighties and nineties, it's encouraging to see B4UACT holding annual conferences in Maryland. Since I never really knew any other time period to compare now to, I at least find my Autie Miller and G. Hannelius crushes are pretty much accepted by my friends and family.
FrankLeeSeaux
Pronounced "frankly so"

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Mar 21, 2012
Location: In the Ether

Total Topics: 29
Total Posts: 2286
#9 - Quote - Permalink
1 of 2 people found this post helpful
Posted Nov 13, 2012 - 11:25 PM:

dgfsdsd wrote:

I at least find my Autie Miller and G. Hannelius crushes are pretty much accepted by my friends and family.


I have a pretty decent crush on Ginger, up there. But, she is sexually and mentally mature enough that I could not be perceived as unduly influencing her, if I made such an attempt. However, in an authoritative society, such as we have, I would very easily have an undue influence on say, my very young nieces, per example, who are, for the most part, under the age of ten.

I use Ginger in this example as someone who is relatable, and because there is a fairly large gap in age. One could easily use the argument that she is young enough to be my daughter. Which is true enough. However, the ready counter to that is, she isn't my daughter.

I use my nieces, simply to add in that portion which is omitted by the inclusion of Ginger... Incest, and sense of authority. I could have just as easily used grade school students as an example, but since I'm not a teacher, I would hardly carry the authority with random strange kids that a teacher or relative would.

And, I use me as an example because, if I'm going to put anyone, under an unwarranted white hot spot light and intense magnifying glass, I'd just as soon that it isn't someone who may take offense, or misunderstand the intention.

Of course, I could just as easily used some fictitious name, but those can get confusing as well.
dgfsdsd
Unmoderated Member

Usergroup: Unmoderated Member
Joined: Nov 04, 2012

Total Topics: 1
Total Posts: 47

Last Blog:

#10 - Quote - Permalink
1 of 2 people found this post helpful
Posted Nov 13, 2012 - 11:34 PM:

FrankLeeSeaux wrote:
I at least find my Autie Miller and G. Hannelius crushes are pretty much accepted by my friends and family.

who are, for the most part, under the age of ten.

G Hannelius is 13 now, but she was a cutie for sure back in Hannah Montana. Autumn Miller is the sexiest eleven year-old in America.
locked
Download thread as
  • 20/5
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5


Recent Internal Replies
On Nov 18, 2012 - 1:49 PM, SittinWSocratesTiff replied internally to swstephe's I think it is easy t....
On Nov 16, 2012 - 10:35 PM, Banno replied internally to FrankLeeSeaux's I'm kinda ....
On Nov 16, 2012 - 1:27 PM, busycuttingcrap replied internally to dgfsdsd's It seems you aren....
On Nov 16, 2012 - 12:21 PM, unenlightened replied internally to πετροκότσιφας's 99% of us laug....
On Nov 16, 2012 - 11:44 AM, Hanover replied internally to dgfsdsd's Scientist Richard ....
On Nov 16, 2012 - 3:07 AM, Banno replied internally to dgfsdsd's "Unfair?" ....
On Nov 15, 2012 - 8:20 AM, busycuttingcrap replied internally to dgfsdsd's I pilgrimaged to t....
On Nov 14, 2012 - 12:34 PM, busycuttingcrap replied internally to dgfsdsd's As I had replied t....
On Nov 14, 2012 - 12:24 PM, dgfsdsd replied internally to dgfsdsd's As I had replied t....
On Nov 14, 2012 - 12:20 PM, busycuttingcrap replied internally to dgfsdsd's As I had replied t....

This thread is closed, so you cannot post a reply.