If you have any doubt of why the expressions of zizek are harmful watch this watch?v=_pGC3zIdlyM . Confusing pedophiles with child molesters leads to depression and suicide of pedophile teens.
If you have any doubt of why the expressions of zizek are harmful watch this watch?v=_pGC3zIdlyM . Confusing pedophiles with child molesters leads to depression and suicide of pedophile teens.
The comments of zizek demonize pedophiles. It equates pedophiles with child molesters. It stigmatizes people based on their sexual orientation. It is full of ignorance and stupidity towards people who deviate from the heteronormativity. Zizek complains about antisemitic or homophobic views, but his own comments stigmatizes sexual minorities and leads to deppresion and suicide of hundreds of teenager pedophiles who grow up thinking they are "child molesters".
equating pedophilia with child abuse, using the terms as synonyms is exactly the same as using the term homosexual like if it was the same as pedophile. Pedophilia is a sexual orientation, not a crime, and there are rapists within every sexual orientation, homosexuals, heterosexuals and pedophiles. But that doesnt mean that being heterosexual, homosexual or pedophile is a crime.
Its outraging that zizek conflates pedophiles with criminals and equates pedophilia with child abuse. Pedophilia is a sexual orientation, not a crime, and pedophiles are people with a different sexual orientation, not criminals. Hating someone for having a different sexual orientation is malevolent, evil, its the same that was said against homosexuals. Pedophilia has nothing to do with celibacy, because your sexual orientation does not change just like that.
Furthermore, a theory for how normal men may become pedophiles as priests lies in the inherent sexual immaturity demanded by celibacy. If a young man enters the priesthood a virgin and is to remain so the rest of his life, while physically mature, he may be stunted at a psycho-sexually pre-pubescent level of experience. As such, he may be drawn to children as his developmental "peers." He himself is a kind of man-child, and may therefore not view sexual acts with children as transgressive.
@bsartist The problem with your theory is that married, sexually active men are, statistically, are absurdly more likely to offend children sexually than celibate Catholic priests. Rates of offending priests are low, something like less than 2% percent. if your hypothesis were true, we would see much higher rates, and an accounting for why, on the contrary, sexually active married men are several hundreds of times more likely to be sex offenders.
@BalladoftheWindfish BULLS**T 2% is not a low figure at all .You just pulled that figure out of your arse , in what universe are married men more likely to abuse kids than catholic priests ? WHERE IS YOUR EVIDENCE ? by your reckoning paedophiles are commonplace BULLS**T BULLS**T BULLS**T BULLS**T BULLS**T
@ZIZEKSKY A child is far, far, far more likely to be abused by a male within the family - a brother, a father, a grandfather, an uncle, etc. These are all definitely not celibate men, so bsartist's theory is exploded. As for the 2% figure, read "Priests and Pedophiles" by Jenkins or any of other relevant studies in the sexual abuse crisis of the CC.
@BalladoftheWindfish Yes, I understand that a child is far more likely to be abused by a male within the family,
Almost all children come into regular contact with family whereas relatively few come in regular contact with the CC. If the figure of 2% is correct then it is a huge number of priests that abuse.
But are you then saying that 2% of of married men abuse children ? it seems to be what you imply.
I am talking about RELATIVE figures although I did not articulate that very well
@rachungpeng1 I think we are forgetting that I was responding to bsartist's original theory, which was that there was something about celibacy that somehow correlates with sexual abuse. Obviously, the data does not bear that out, since 1) far more priests than not are not implicated in sexual abuse and 2) far more non-celibate men and women sexually abuse children. It is enough to explode bsartist's theory. It is simplistic and bigoted.
It could also be argued that the nature of celibacy in the priesthood attracts and gives cover to men who have abnormal sexual impulses to begin with. They are supposed to be cut off from normal adult human sexuality as part of their office, whereas in the secular world such apparent lack of engagement with normal expressions of sexuality would invite uncomfortable questions. It's as though they're deliberately hiding from something under the umbrella of supposed "abstinence."
If you put a bunch of men in an institution, forbid them to marry and have children and let them listen to other people's ugliest sins - I wonder how can they stay sane for so long
It has to do with repressed desire for having their own children. I think it's a form of aberrant love, which they never had
This has been flagged as spam show
If you have any doubt of why the expressions of zizek are harmful watch this watch?v=_pGC3zIdlyM . Confusing pedophiles with child molesters leads to depression and suicide of pedophile teens.
saraband2 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
If you have any doubt of why the expressions of zizek are harmful watch this watch?v=_pGC3zIdlyM . Confusing pedophiles with child molesters leads to depression and suicide of pedophile teens.
eugenesia03 2 months ago
The comments of zizek demonize pedophiles. It equates pedophiles with child molesters. It stigmatizes people based on their sexual orientation. It is full of ignorance and stupidity towards people who deviate from the heteronormativity. Zizek complains about antisemitic or homophobic views, but his own comments stigmatizes sexual minorities and leads to deppresion and suicide of hundreds of teenager pedophiles who grow up thinking they are "child molesters".
saraband2 2 months ago
equating pedophilia with child abuse, using the terms as synonyms is exactly the same as using the term homosexual like if it was the same as pedophile. Pedophilia is a sexual orientation, not a crime, and there are rapists within every sexual orientation, homosexuals, heterosexuals and pedophiles. But that doesnt mean that being heterosexual, homosexual or pedophile is a crime.
saraband2 2 months ago
Its outraging that zizek conflates pedophiles with criminals and equates pedophilia with child abuse. Pedophilia is a sexual orientation, not a crime, and pedophiles are people with a different sexual orientation, not criminals. Hating someone for having a different sexual orientation is malevolent, evil, its the same that was said against homosexuals. Pedophilia has nothing to do with celibacy, because your sexual orientation does not change just like that.
saraband2 2 months ago
Furthermore, a theory for how normal men may become pedophiles as priests lies in the inherent sexual immaturity demanded by celibacy. If a young man enters the priesthood a virgin and is to remain so the rest of his life, while physically mature, he may be stunted at a psycho-sexually pre-pubescent level of experience. As such, he may be drawn to children as his developmental "peers." He himself is a kind of man-child, and may therefore not view sexual acts with children as transgressive.
bsartist 9 months ago
@bsartist The problem with your theory is that married, sexually active men are, statistically, are absurdly more likely to offend children sexually than celibate Catholic priests. Rates of offending priests are low, something like less than 2% percent. if your hypothesis were true, we would see much higher rates, and an accounting for why, on the contrary, sexually active married men are several hundreds of times more likely to be sex offenders.
BalladoftheWindfish 9 months ago
@BalladoftheWindfish BULLS**T 2% is not a low figure at all .You just pulled that figure out of your arse , in what universe are married men more likely to abuse kids than catholic priests ? WHERE IS YOUR EVIDENCE ? by your reckoning paedophiles are commonplace BULLS**T BULLS**T BULLS**T BULLS**T BULLS**T
ZIZEKSKY 3 months ago
@ZIZEKSKY A child is far, far, far more likely to be abused by a male within the family - a brother, a father, a grandfather, an uncle, etc. These are all definitely not celibate men, so bsartist's theory is exploded. As for the 2% figure, read "Priests and Pedophiles" by Jenkins or any of other relevant studies in the sexual abuse crisis of the CC.
BalladoftheWindfish 3 months ago
@BalladoftheWindfish Yes, I understand that a child is far more likely to be abused by a male within the family,
Almost all children come into regular contact with family whereas relatively few come in regular contact with the CC. If the figure of 2% is correct then it is a huge number of priests that abuse.
But are you then saying that 2% of of married men abuse children ? it seems to be what you imply.
I am talking about RELATIVE figures although I did not articulate that very well
rachungpeng1 2 months ago
@rachungpeng1 I think we are forgetting that I was responding to bsartist's original theory, which was that there was something about celibacy that somehow correlates with sexual abuse. Obviously, the data does not bear that out, since 1) far more priests than not are not implicated in sexual abuse and 2) far more non-celibate men and women sexually abuse children. It is enough to explode bsartist's theory. It is simplistic and bigoted.
BalladoftheWindfish 2 months ago
@BalladoftheWindfish As for 2% being a huge number, I guess you would be shocked, then, by the rates of abuse by non-priests.
BalladoftheWindfish 2 months ago
It could also be argued that the nature of celibacy in the priesthood attracts and gives cover to men who have abnormal sexual impulses to begin with. They are supposed to be cut off from normal adult human sexuality as part of their office, whereas in the secular world such apparent lack of engagement with normal expressions of sexuality would invite uncomfortable questions. It's as though they're deliberately hiding from something under the umbrella of supposed "abstinence."
bsartist 9 months ago
"it was the institution itself that made them pedophiles" LMAO!!!!
milloselmejor 10 months ago
The counter is counting how many times Zizek touches his nose!
BenNCM 11 months ago 5
If you put a bunch of men in an institution, forbid them to marry and have children and let them listen to other people's ugliest sins - I wonder how can they stay sane for so long
It has to do with repressed desire for having their own children. I think it's a form of aberrant love, which they never had
pawsoned 11 months ago
Why is there a counter going down besides zizek?
It feels like he's losing something. Like audience members going away...
BrunoAlvesCoelho 11 months ago