Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

[deleted] t1_iqpetkx wrote

Which side are you referring to?

5

Misanthropedup t1_iqpmgtg wrote

Yeah, I’m a bit confused.

EDIT: Right side, judging purely based on comment history.

3

[deleted] t1_iqpn7ms wrote

Gotcha. I was kinda confused about what the OP was getting at

2

JackDMcLovin OP t1_iqpn7mo wrote

The ones in the comments, and the "love is love". Pedophilia is love, does that make it okay?

0

[deleted] t1_iqpnbr0 wrote

I would not say pedophilia is love. Pedophilia is being sexually attracted to someone you most definitely should not be attracted to (minors).

3

Iceman_Hottie t1_iqpu0ib wrote

It also follows the same pattern as abuse and domestic violence, due to the damage done to one of the parties in order to bring pleasure to the other.

2

JackDMcLovin OP t1_iqpnijp wrote

Philia means love

−1

Iceman_Hottie t1_iqpuplo wrote

Words can have several meanings, in this case attraction rather than love. An example would be hydrophilic molecules.

3

JackDMcLovin OP t1_iqpvose wrote

Exactly, so is LGBT out of attraction, or out of a Christlike love? Are you doing it because you like it, or because that is what is right to do? And by right i mean your duty as a replicator.

1

Iceman_Hottie t1_iqpxtub wrote

LGB (T is a separate thing) from a biological standpoint are variations of the reproductive instinct. The instinct itself evolutionarily came about a very long time ago and can be seen in pretty much all multicellular life.

Humans have evolved further as there is a need for a large parental investment for the offspring to survive, and have a mechanism that creates a neurological response based on the emotions of others that includes more complex interactions. For example feeling good after we have helped someone we care about (oxytocin and vasopressin associated dopamine response).

Therefore, for while not reproductively beneficial, LGB follows (or at least can follow) the rest of the patten of a healthy relationship. Circling back to the original topic, a mutually exclusive thing with pedophilia. Its a bit more complex than that, but that's the gist.

5

Manyoshu t1_iqpw8f1 wrote

"Look at how bad other people are at reasoning!"

Goes on to base the entire content of an argument on an etymological fallacy.

Alright.

The etymological claim does not even add up, by the way, the modern concept of love is derived from a developed conception that mostly comes to us through Latin amor (equivalent to Greek érōs, not philía) which has been expanded and given new meaning over time. There is no direct translation so that "love" in the etymological origin of the word "pedophilia" has the same sense as "love" in the sentence "love is love".

3

[deleted] t1_iqpnnn5 wrote

Quote all the etymology you want. There's nothing about pedophilia that implicates real love. And the fact that you're trying to say it is (or at least say it is for the sake of your argument) is horrendous.

2

Iceman_Hottie t1_iqpvv8w wrote

Not all love is equal. Is the love for your country the same as your SO? Is your love for pizza the same as your parents? In both cases the answer is no, hence "love is love" is a falce equivalency.

In the case of pedophilia it follows the pattern of abuse/abusive relationships rather than equitable and mutually beneficial ones. So you could say it is the same as the love for abusing and torturing.

3