Discussion group needs general input on love and sexuality.

**Posts:** 1 · by **Tribble** » Fri Apr 27, 2012 5:57 pm

Right off the bat, I am going to apologize. This is going to be a lengthy post and might not have been posted in the correct area. If not, would a moderator please move it.

Let me introduce myself. I am a normal, healthy, adult male. I am married and have several children of my own. I am not a clinician or anything even close. My peers and I, however, hold weekly cerebral discussions where we pick a topic and tear it apart.

Recently, my peers and I have been discussing the concepts of love and sexuality. Topics include:

- are they matually exclusive, or intrinsicly related
- can they be experienced in degrees
- can they be further classified into sub-categories
- how gender, race, religion and age affects understanding
- is reciprocality mandatory with true love

Some example would be the differences in how one loves their spouse versus how they love their children and other relatives.

Some of my peers seemed to think that love, when isolated, is either on or off, while others think that it is layered in degrees. Personally, I think it would be impossible to define criteria for such layering. I'm interested to see what others think.

Ultimately, we came to the consensus that love is the admiration, respect and desire for the well being, and happiness of, another. While sexuality is a purely physical attraction, reaction, and desire for contact with another person. We also seemed to agree that each can be experienced on it's own, without the other present.

When viewed with these assumptions, it might be safely said the love for a spouse may indeed be intrinsically the same as love for any other person.

However, there were some point for contention that tested our conclusions.

One of the stickiest points in our discussions so far revolves around extreme age differences. Naturally, the discussing devolved into a rather argumentative debate on paedophila.

While we each understand the basic clinical definition of paedophilia (the desire for sex between adult and child), it became clear that we didn't all agree on our understanding of it in regards to love.

To help clarify the question I am posing, consider the following assertions:
- paedophilia is an attraction, on the part of an adult, of a sexual nature, to a child
- child must be under the age of consent
- age difference must be at least five years

Also please note the realization that not all paedophiles become molesters and not all molesters are actually paedophiles.

So here is the question posed by one of my peers:
Is it possible, with the separation of love and sexuality, for an adult to have romantic feelings for a child, with absolutely no desire what-so-ever to engage in a physical relationship, and would such a person still be considered a paedophile, considering sex is no longer part of the equation and that the clinical diagnosis does not reference actual love?

My own response to this question was:
You cited romantice feelings. Romance seems to be where love and sexuality overlap. In my opinion, it is the joining factor, where the two meet. So my answer is 'no'. It isn't possible, as romance includes both love and the desire for sex.

I am very interested to hear what others might think about the topic, so I can pass it along to my group for further debate.

Thank you for your time.

**Posts:** 852 · by **ellla** » Sat May 05, 2012 7:19 pm

Tribble wrote:
So here is the question posed by one of my peers:
Is it possible, with the separation of love and sexuality, for an adult to have romantic feelings for a child, with absolutely no desire what-so-ever to engage in a physical relationship, and would such a person still be considered a paedophile, considering sex is no longer part of the equation and that the clinical diagnosis does not reference actual love?

A, Yes in my opinion - I think it is possible for an adult to have "romantic" feelings for a child without a desire for a (sexual) relationship with that child . Why you are a parent yourself and so on refection may understand this.

Romance by my definition is - first and foremost an Emotional connection. A strong feeling of love, warmth, deep affection, joy. Happiness in the company of the person for who we have these romantic feelings. The adult may also be tactile with the child, cuddling, kissing appropriately, hold hands, stroking their hair, cheek, finding their physique appealing ...sweet, cute, cherub like.

All of these feelings to me represent Love...

So feelings of "Romance" Can most certainly experienced by an Adult toward a Child - boy or girl, son, daughter, niece , nephew, family friend. Without the desire to have sexual relations with the child. These feelings are what I determine as being " Appropriate" responsible, and healthy feelings of 'love' between an Adult and Child. I certainly have these romantic feelings toward my own children, and children within my wider extended family.

B,To answer the second half of your question no I do not consider myself a paedophile for doing so. Nor would I consider any adult who felt the same.

Romance seems to be where love and sexuality overlap. In my opinion, it is the joining factor, where the two meet. So my answer is 'no'. It isn't possible, as romance includes both love and the desire for sex.

This of course it true ..but the major difference between two adults is that the sexual overlap (the desire) is "appropriative "
because the other person involved is also adult and so each "instinctively knows" this overlap is "appropriate " and so then becomes a natural progression within a relationship between the two adults.

Some paedophiles actively choose to overlook or disregard the" inappropriateness" and so then may go on to committing an offence against the child.

We must always remember that appropriateness of a sexual relationship is always determined by the Culture and Mentality of the Society in which a person lives. And not by the Individual Adult themselves

**Posts:** 99 · by **zemane** » Sun May 06, 2012 1:34 am

Tribble wrote:Right off the bat, I am going to apologize. This is going to be a lengthy post and might not have been posted in the correct area. If not, would a moderator please move it.

Let me introduce myself. I am a normal, healthy, adult male. I am married and have several children of my own. I am not a clinician or anything even close. My peers and I, however, hold weekly cerebral discussions where we pick a topic and tear it apart.

Recently, my peers and I have been discussing the concepts of love and sexuality. Topics include:

- are they matually exclusive, or intrinsicly related
- can they be experienced in degrees
- can they be further classified into sub-categories
- how gender, race, religion and age affects understanding
- is reciprocality mandatory with true love

Some example would be the differences in how one loves their spouse versus how they love their children and other relatives.

Some of my peers seemed to think that love, when isolated, is either on or off, while others think that it is layered in degrees. Personally, I think it would be impossible to define criteria for such layering. I'm interested to see what others think.

Ultimately, we came to the consensus that love is the admiration, respect and desire for the well being, and happiness of, another. While sexuality is a purely physical attraction, reaction, and desire for contact with another person. We also seemed to agree that each can be experienced on it's own, without the other present.

When viewed with these assumptions, it might be safely said the love for a spouse may indeed be intrinsically the same as love for any other person.

However, there were some point for contention that tested our conclusions.

One of the stickiest points in our discussions so far revolves around extreme age differences. Naturally, the discussing devolved into a rather argumentative debate on paedophila.

While we each understand the basic clinical definition of paedophilia (the desire for sex between adult and child), it became clear that we didn't all agree on our understanding of it in regards to love.

To help clarify the question I am posing, consider the following assertions:
- paedophilia is an attraction, on the part of an adult, of a sexual nature, to a child
- child must be under the age of consent
- age difference must be at least five years

Also please note the realization that not all paedophiles become molesters and not all molesters are actually paedophiles.

So here is the question posed by one of my peers:
Is it possible, with the separation of love and sexuality, for an adult to have romantic feelings for a child, with absolutely no desire what-so-ever to engage in a physical relationship, and would such a person still be considered a paedophile, considering sex is no longer part of the equation and that the clinical diagnosis does not reference actual love?

My own response to this question was:
You cited romantice feelings. Romance seems to be where love and sexuality overlap. In my opinion, it is the joining factor, where the two meet. So my answer is 'no'. It isn't possible, as romance includes both love and the desire for sex.

I am very interested to hear what others might think about the topic, so I can pass it along to my group for further debate.

Thank you for your time.

I do seriously think that the current accepted meaning of the word LOVE was coined by religion/society to try to validate the marriage tradition and is supposed to incorporate and try to address many instinctive needs we have.

Examples:

-feel that someone cares, after leaving the parents presence
-Care for someone
-Delight in the beautiful
-need to feel protected and to protect
-sex
-loneliness
-admire and feel admired
-dominate and be dominated (or owned)
-need of enforcement of limits
-fear of living by ourselves
-conquest/adventure
-good company
-many more

And those instinctive needs are not necessarily directed to the same person as most of them are unrelated. But to advocate marriage they were grouped into a single sentiment called LOVE. Now we have all the conflicts that we see between couples today.

My own definition of LOVE is when you care so much about someone that you need that only good things happen to this person. That is just one of the instinctive needs I listed above.

Discussion group needs general input on love and sexuality.

#1

#2

Main Menu

Relationship Resources

Recent posts

Active topics

Contact Us