the minor end of the spectrum of pedophilia.
ludwig,
do you really believe that when paedophilia is concerned that you can put a degree on it ? it's like saying he only hurt the kid a littlebit, besides the kid's too young to remember. It may be part of normal human behaviour in your book but in my book it also is part of human behaviour to chastise paedophiles from one end of the spectrum to the other.

Oh dear individual. Surely you are not suggesting that they should all just be treated the same!?

Do you think a female school teacher who had a one-night stand with a male minor, with his consent and which caused him no harm, should be treated the same as the ringleader of a child pornography network or a serial child rapist?

Of COURSE there are ‘degrees’ of paedophilia.

Mr Ludwig,

Pedophiles may not be alone in preying on small children - but they are the most repugnant.

As for your deserving a straight forward answer from me - well, as you told me - you don't know me from a bar of soap... And, I don't know the last time you washed...

So I don't know what you deserve...

My telling you Sir, to think about what you're saying to me, then take an intelligent guess as to the answer - did not imply any subintelligence on your part - on the contrary - my assumption was - that you did have the intelligence to work things out for yourself.

Do you think a female school teacher who had a one-night stand with a male minor, with his consent and which caused him no harm....
Ludwig,
that scenario is not paedophilia. that's just a cheap excuse for legal parasites to make a dollar.

“So I don't know what you deserve...”

Yes you do Foxy….surely you’d realise that every poster deserves a straightforward logical response to a direct question asked in good faith, unless they have written something that is strongly and deliberately personally offensive to you. That’s just basic forum etiquette, isn’t it?

It is also rather important for any argument that you are putting forward that you be seen to be able to answer any queries addressed to you.

You have a nice manner (“Dear Ludwig”, “Mr Ludwig”, “Sir”). I appreciate that. But it needs to not be compromised by belittling non-answers to direct questions.

“Pedophiles may not be alone in preying on small children - but they are the most repugnant.”

SOME are highly repugnant. Not all.

I guess you now agree that the magnitude of paedophilic crimes varies enormously as it does with all categories of crime, and that paedophiles per se must NOT be singled out, but rather, each case must be considered on its own circumstances?

Individual, I must say I was expecting a response just like that.

You have not addressed my point; that there ARE ‘degrees’ of paedophilia; which was written in direct response to your point expressing the opposite view. So do you now agree or not?

“that scenario is not paedophilia. that's just a cheap excuse for legal parasites to make a dollar.”

I agree that this particular scenario should not be considered to be paedophilia. But technically it is.

It is not a matter of legal parasites profiting from it, it is a matter of an innocent but unfortunate oversimplification of the law, or overencompassment of sexual situations involving minors under the banner of paedophilia.

Although it would be hard to remove it from under the paedophilia banner, because the reverse situation of a male teacher and a female student would still be highly frowned upon, which then creates the problem of blatant sexual discrimination if it is not going to apply where post-puberty male minors are involved. So it is not that straightforward.