Why do homophobes compare homosexuality to pedophilia?

Question

I've noticed homophobes like to compare homosexual acts to pedophilia to help push their bigotry. Can't people understand that homosexuals are two grown ups who are capable of making their own decisions? Pedophilia means you are attracted to a child, children are often helpless and can't fend for themselves. Homosexuals can make up their own minds when it comes to a spouse. Why do people continue to use that argument???

Answer 1

@7guy8



I wouldn't call us ignorant when your answer has just as much BS as ours. Why would there need to be a cure for homosexuality in the first place? How is it harming society in any way? Its not. Pedophilia (which you don't even know how to spell.) harms innocent children that don't know what to do in a situation like that. You also use the word "stigmatize" meaning a disgraceful act. This is your own opinion which makes it in no way a fact. Your whole response is completely ignorant and is doing nothing but showing your opinion.



Pedophilia and Homosexuality have nothing to do with each other. The bigots use it just to make us look bad because they are ignorant and don't know what they are talking about. Molesting a child and loving someone don't even compare.

Answer 2

Because of major PR and political blunders made in the 70s concerning gay activists and age-of-consent laws. It has little to do with sexual orientation and everything to do with the chaos that emerges from umbrella groups and the fallacy of believing in "safety in numbers."



Read up on the Boston Boise Committee, and how NAMBLA became a gay rights "ally" in the 70s and 80s. Activists accused the police of using age-of-consent laws as a way of targeting the gay community, and rather than demanding that the laws be applied fairly to both the heterosexual and homosexual population, they made the mistake of denouncing the laws themselves. Lesbian activists refused to be associated (or participate in events) with NAMBLA from the very beginning, and responsible gay activists spoke out against the group throughout the 80s, but the group wasn't officially denounced by activist groups like GLAAD and the NGLTF until 1994. You'll find predatory behavior in all sexual orientations, but the comparison stems more from political association, not sexual orientation.



This should serve as a warning to any political activist group who believes that allying themselves with other groups will give them more political clout. Each letter you place after LGBT comes with its own unique assets, liabilities, and baggage.

Answer 3

I think some people just don't understand it, or refuse to understand homosexuality. It's hurtful and offensive when people put us on the same list as criminals. It's like saying gay marriage will "open the door" to polygamy and all that other stuff. It's stupid. It's exactly the same as saying that blacks or jews are inferior to whites. it's just ignorance, bigotry, and unjustified hatred. They try to scare other people into relating homosexuality with criminal behaviour. EDIT Also, people who say homosexuality is a deviance from biological processes should also include sex for pleasure as a deviance. Contraception, in that case, is deviant. Any type of sex without procreation is a "deviance" - when in fact, this is not true. humans have evolved to a point where we have the technology to have sex for pleasure (contraception) without pursuing reproductive ends. Dolphins, too, have sex for pleasure, and they don't have rational minds (as far as we know) to decide this. So it must be instinctual. Sorry for ranting, but this really does make me mad!

Answer 4

The problem isn't comparing homosexuality to pedophilia at all. If they are really compared for things they have in common. But that's not usually the case. However, homosexual advocates too often bash pedophiles instead on focusing on the flawed part. By which they support prejudices against pedophiles and allows others to criticize them for hypocrisy. For the argumentation: Well, if you can deny science and be prejudicial against someone, so we can.



The most common kind of argument is that if we allow marriages / sexual activities between the people of the same sex, we should allow marriages of adults with children or adult-child sexual activities. Of course trying you to reject both. And what you should spot it that it isn't about homosexuals and pedophiles in the first place. There isn't anywhere that it's only homosexuals who can do those things. You don't have to advocate legality of sexual activities between same sex couples, it's up to those who want to ban it to give a good reasons for that. And we don't only ban adult-child sex relationships for adults, who are pedophiles, but for all adults.



Do we have reasons for that? I think we do, children are generally less mature than adults. Marriage is a major legal act, we don't let children to make legal acts of similar severity. We know that with sexual activities there is a big risk of a significant harm for the child. And also children are less capable of defending themselves and it would be difficult spot those, who are just using the child for themselves without caring about the interests of the child, so setting an age of consent is also a tool to prevent that.



You can counter attack people, who use such argument, you can ask them, if they think adult-child sex relationships and child marriages aren't legal just because people think pedophiles are monsters, if they have no other reason for that. If they'd vote for allowing them if if there was a compelling evidence that pedophiles in general don't differ much or at all in personality from others and that they don't choose to be pedophiles.



Anyway, you can't argue that just because someone has a desire to do someone, they should be allowed to do that. The fact, that you have desires to do something doesn't give you a right to do that. Even small kids in the sandbox usually quickly finds out that they can't just take someone a toy because they want to play with it. But by the same principle you can't forbid someone doing something just because you don't like it.



And delete from your head things like homosexual are two grown ups. No, it doesn't matter how many people you have. It's about what sexual orientation they have. If you have a one person attracted to persons of the same sex on a bare island, it doesn't make the person any less homosexual. No pair of the following terms are equivalent: homosexual (person), homosexuality, same-sex sexual activities, same-sex marriage, same-sex sexual activities, sexual activities between homosexuals (there are heterosexual people who've engaged in same-sex sexual activities - it can be because of curiosity, because unavailability of the opposite sex person etc.), same-sex couples.

Answer 5

Sure, do you marry the one who you are attracted to? or just finding someone who is gay like you?



Also, taking the “what’s next?” argument to its logical conclusion, we would have to apply it to interracial marriage, too. Interracial marriage was not legally recognized in the United States until 1967, when the Supreme Court overturned the country’s anti-miscegenation laws in the ruling Loving v. Virginia. If a person uses the “what’s next?” argument to challenge gay marriage, they must also use it to challenge interracial marriage, because in both cases, the definition of marriage was extended to include a broader subset of couples. But nobody would argue that letting black people marry white people would inevitably lead to pedophilia and bestiality, because interracial marriage involves mutual consent between human adults, while pedophilia and bestiality do not. Similarly, nobody should be arguing that letting people marry members of the same sex will inevitably lead to pedophilia and bestiality, because gay marriage involves mutual consent between human adults, while pedophilia and bestiality do not. So, no, expanding the definition of marriage to include a larger subset of couples does not entail expanding the definition of marriage to include sexual abuse.

Answer 6

We use the analogy of paedophilia to show the flaws in your arguments. Because usually your mind wont allow you to think critically about yourselves, so we go to the next closest thing that we know you will think critically about. We're not claiming that all gay people are paedophiles or that gay people are as bad as paedophiles.



Now let me ask you a question: Why do gay advocates compare homosexuality to eye colour, skin colour and height? Which do you think is the more accurate analogy to use? Homosexuality and paedophilia have a lot of things in common: They are both stigmatized erotic attractions, and there's no easy, replicable way to cure either. Now, what does homosexuality have in common with eye colour? Apparently, the reason for this analogy is to make the point that we wouldn't stigmatize somebody for being born with a certain eye colour, so it must be wrong to stigmatize somebody for being born gay. But since it's never been proven that homosexuality is genetically determined, the analogy fails completely. So in short, homosexuality has nothing in common with eye colour.



Furthermore, why do gay advocates prefer to use far-fetched analogies rather than the more obvious ones? It's because paedophilia still carries much stigma, and eye colour doesn't. Your goal is to make homosexuality look good--not to make people see it clearly for what it is.



I know your question was disingenuous and you only wanted confirmation for your prejudices, but I simply couldn't allow all these ignorant comments to go unchallenged.



REPLY TO I LOVE PIE: Did you even process anything I said? I never said homosexuality has to be cured, and I explicitly stated that homosexuality isn't as bad as paedophilia (which is the correct British spelling, by the way). And it's funny how you all throw around the word bigot when you have nothing meaningful to say.

Answer 7

"Why do homophobes compare homosexuality to pedophilia?"



Lack of knowledge about human sexuality and general lack of logic thought on how comparison actually works.

Answer 8

They're idiots

Answer 9

because they are grasping at straws trying to link being gay to something that is actually bad