Child sexual bias: Understanding the ideological roots of child sexual abuse

 What is child sexual bias? There are many conditions afflicting those who hate survivors. One of the most common ones is child sexual bias. "Child" is based on the concept that pedophiles tend to admit privilege over chronological children over adult survivors. They seem too flawed to us as adults, whereas authority given from children can do no wrong.

If you go around pressing men as to why rape is wrong, you may get some interesting, twisted answers. Many men on, say, a college campus, can be protective of every trauma BUT rape. They may say "She doesn't want it, that's rape" but then say "Some women are such whores, waiting until the end then stopping, saying it's rape". Similar biases in pedophiles might make some in the population of pedophiles in society more likely to abuse a child.

A virtuous pedophile is basically a pedophile that doesn't rationalize. They just know it is wrong. Pedophilia, for them, is a far removed fetish - far removed from the sight and impact of the child. They know it is wrong in real life, so they learn to create this fantasy world in their heads where children consent and can consent, and it makes perfect sense to them except in real life. Other pedophiles, like I was, rationalize more.

I originally joined the Virtuous Pedophiles forum with a peacekeeper of child sexual bias that I wanted to eliminate, not knowing the purpose of the group. The first obstacle was the rule against debating the age of consent. I then went to making thread upon thread of self-flagellation. I, like some other prominent members of note, have a "love" addiction. I rarely ever use that word - only when I mean it. I rationalized, in the past, whether a young girl liked me due to how she smiled at me, and how helpful she was by my perception. The board was not for me, and is one of two groups I forcibly left, with VirPed with a note of distemper in my eyes, as a Christian, knowing the true source of their oppression.

I then tried ETC, and that was helpful - shock of first-person accounts, in a good way. Shockwave therapy. A few members did traumatic ambushes, in a way that I felt myself getting angry at a topic that I repressed the anger on. I knew I was angry at sexual abusers of children, but I repressed it to the point of ignoring the topic. It was ignorance and insensitivity, much like the kid who jokes about the fire alarm or even the school building catching fire. That's not virtuous, but if I didn't get help at VirPed, and went straight to children's rights, I would have been flamed out of here for saying something stupid...and yes, it was beliefs that were stupid, and full of holes and confusion. Hence why I considered it a mental disorder. I was speaking about myself personally, and applying it to anyone who could relate. If you couldn't relate, fine, just don't argue or judge.

I'm not afraid of trauma, I've found. I'm a trauma lover. We can get pretty guilted with trauma, if we don't know what it is. I kind of feel like a loving parent over an infant or young child, tending to their needs, with listening and validation, and it's like an obligation to be nice to trauma. The only difference is when trauma isn't nice to you, in which case you inflame it using your own trauma. In my case, my trauma can mimick a full victimizing narcissist, then reel back, as the victim psychopath that I am in relation to abusers. I believe all abusers use their trauma in some way, in some form, but so do victims to defend themselves against antisocial trauma.

I don't feel any need to cure the child's trauma. It's about her patience towards my trauma, and everyday stress, in a way that would be antisocial "company". I need to know the limits, and religious legal systems help out a great deal. It involved empowering the child herself to remove me from the equation if possible. In the vast majority of situations, I'd believe the child over the parent, but in the vast majority of situations, they say the same thing, even as teenagers - "you're a f*cking creep" -  and then I know I have abused a child. The moment a child says that to my presence, the moment I am flagged as an abuser. I am entitled to absolutely nothing from any child. I can ask politely, but not for everything, since a marriage would burden a young girl, and thus not be out of love, and thus would not be recognized as a Christian marriage by God.

I now justify my anti-contact beliefs on two rationales, an evolutionary one and an anti-entitlement one:

1. Children have a fight-or-flight response to all adults, as they are seen as authority figures in our country, and otherwise are charged to give care and support, thus conflict of interest based on menace.
2. Reordering society in any tense of the term is adult sexual entitlement for wanting things to be the adult's way in terms of sexuality, in which case sex isn't even a right to begin with (by values, at least).

Now, I just go by commonsense, meaning its never going to happen. VirPed values are more conservative than children's rights values on sex with children, and so I default to those. Children's rights allows for sex between older teens and adults, "ideally speaking" and "depending on the level of care". There always is a level of care, and otherwise changing norms just for the sake of changing norms is a slippery slope to what GirlChat wants - no age of consent. We know that at VirPed, and simply stick with the ages we got, though I believe it should be raised to 18 here in Pennsylvania. Why? The age of majority signals a power of attorney, and any time someone has power of attorney over you, it is a bad idea to have sex with them. The age of majority basically separates adults and children in this regard, and will for the end of time, thus allowing a 16-year-old to have sex with an 18-year-old opens the pandora's box to everything else.

We have way too much legal already. How about time we roll back all this sexual immorality and debauchery in society, as sex is not a right, but a privilege within a Christian marriage, meaning duties within such a contract and sacrament. A child will never be my bride, and a child will never be my sex partner, even at her wishes, as she has the right to a childhood free from abuse, namely sexual abuse.

I was a sexually entitled adult, and now I am not, perhaps. We'll let the constituency decide whether I am a good person around children or not, and the opinion that I see is mixed, but gracious given my actions.