What Georgescu says: It’s about standards, not about biology or psychology.
Homosexuality, paedophilia and incest is of all time.Sometimes they were highly valued (homosexuality and paedophilia e.g. in ancient Greece and ancient Asia, inlands etc. -Incest BV at the Ancient Egyptians (pharaohs), aristocracy and royal houses), sometimes maligated. The zeitgeist is much more appropriate for something like determining whether something is different from biology or psychology.
In Our zeitgeist, homosexuality is no longer deviating, but within limited circles.Refored, Americans, North Africans, footballers and tough men etc. Still see it as deviating. The rejection of paedophilia is much more global-but also here with the necessary reservations. Over The age BV on which a girl is seen as sexually tunable is strongly differently thought.
Both biology and psychology acknowledge and describe the existence of homosexuality, paedophilia, incest, gerontoophilia and the long range of other sexual manifestations.The assessment in ‘ good and evil ‘ is done by others. In short, you are misusing both biology and psychology.
Oh, and when it comes to falling somewhere: That’s what you have invented yourself.Nowhere is it where you need to fall. Also a norm again.
Paedophilia is seen as harmful because it would impair the psychological development of a child.A child would have trauma to it. And a child does not know what it wants at a young age.
In homosexuality nowadays, it would be two adult men or women who are both willing to have sex with each other and know they really want to.There would be no inequality and dominance of one over the other.
In our individualistic society, equivalence is taken as the yardstick to determine whether something is lawful or mental illness.
People or groups of people who do not use this benchmark are considered old-fashioned and intolerant in Dutch society.They are therefore not considered representative of the Dutch population. Therefore one finds paedophilia something only and gay normally and naturally.
Mainly because gays only make each other happy (trying to) when they are together and give paedophiles little to find or feel the children they are rushing at their perversity.One is love that runs a little differently than is normal, the other is crime. The one is seen by people who are not as short-sighted as fine, the other is seen by no one except paedophiles as fine. Indeed, you succeeded in naming a kind of agreement between the two. But it does not matter how it belongs in nature, firstly because David Hume had a good point, secondly because we do not live in the forest anymore (I at least not).
“Why do we hate Hitler and do we find KFC just fine?They both make everything dead. ” Maybe because there are other differences according to most people.
Homosexuality is not harmful.Two adults can decide who to go to bed or who they love. Or that biological “hears”, is not really interesting.
Paedophilia is disgusting because those people abuse young children.Of children you stay away.
So to hear you don’t know how it goes with biology.Who decides on what to fall.
A lot of animals come only once a year to the opposite sex to mate.The rest of the year they often live in large groups of the same sex. It is also very normal for animals during those months to have close ties that look like homoophilia in our eyes.
Cattle and deer, for example.Is the pair right destined only for the winner. But it is very normal that the remaining teenagers ascend to get rid of their sexual frustration. Or exercise.
Many people in antiquity also found it very normal to share their love with both sexes.The Romans were very normal.
Where do you get the idea that Homoophilia is unnatural, organically seen?Indeed, it is very much recommended that in certain cultures more different-sexual individuals are present, if this culture grows rapidly. The mortality rate of parents is not predicting and homoophilia is in no way a threat to heterosexual (consciously a certain of itself) people. Paedophilia though. The difference is also in the place where each of the two comes from: 1. Homoophilia is a personal behavior that is only answered when the other ADULT (self-controlled and responsible-using) person enters into this. 2. Paedophilia, however, is a psychological/emotional condition in which an adult person has not learned to deal with rejection by possible partners. In the course of time, they will focus on individuals from society that offer less resistance or remind them of the time they did not have to process the rejections on a sexual level. This means that there is a problem in the operation of the individual. Now the other quick:
A homosexual woman comes across another homosexual woman (oh wait you didn’t have it in mind, you’d rather want your confirmation bias towards men?No, unfortunately, this occurs in both sexes. They find each other fun and enjoy each other’s presence. They choose a relationship. Great! Both happy.
A homogenial man meets a homosexual woman.They find each other fun and enjoy each other’s presence. They become friends because both cannot bring sexual stimuli. Great! Both find a partner who does fit and everyone happy.
A homosexual man is opposed to a non-homogenial man.One likes the other, but that is not mutual. They may or may not be friends, and look for another suitable partner. Both happy.
Now a pedophilic woman.(yes I understand that you might think of it only to men) She meets a heterosexual man, but she is not interested in her. He continues to search, while she has been given a very bad self-image by the rejection (often she has this, but gets worse) and looks for another solution. Attempt to attempt to go wrong and she notices that young people respond better to the attention of women. She notices that she is not rejected and the youngest of the youngsters see the woman as a kind of mother. The sexual frustration gives her the prompting to express it in less distant ‘ partners ‘. She gives them attention and is found that the youth that is already beyond puberty is resilient, but the youth that is not is easier to ‘ approach ‘. Slowly but surely the awareness of what is ethically correct is fading through the desire to be loved too. Children cannot make a distinction, and always enjoy attention. Ultimately, the choice and dependence of children on adults ensures that the woman can perform sexual acts with children. These children are not yet sexually capable of naming it for the law. They are not yet able to take decisions independently with a good eye for the consequences. Many of the children who have been abused by Pedophilic people have suffered their lives for a long time and can often themselves difficult (certainly without professional help) to build a healthy sexual relationship. This is the big difference. Homohilic MAY also BE accompanied by paedophilia, but the latter is the damaging factor.
‘, ‘ Moral beliefs depend on time and place.In the Middle Ages and now in Saudi Arabia there was/is the opposite where: gays deserve the death penalty. Most Saudi have no objection to paedophilia per se: You may marry one or more young girls. In The Middle Ages teenagers were allowed to just marry.
“,” Organically, we like other apes are bisexual.For bonobo Monkeys For example (our close family) is having sex a way of communicating. They don’t fight, they don’t argue, they have sex.
The chimpanzee (also our closest family) live on the other side of the Congo River where they are threatened by the gorillas.Those fighting though, are more aggressive and sex is primarily a way to dominate the other.
Its determines consciousness.
‘, ‘ They are both deviating as well.But it is pushed by people their throat that homosexuality is normal. But it is not normal from a biological/psychological perspective. However, this does not mean that if something ‘ deviates ‘ from the norm no acceptance is possible. At Homoophilia, you actually have two equal value people who both have a full understanding of each other without being traumatic. In paedophilia, it is different, the child is abused and psychological and physical harm is done. This is not an equal relationship. So the difference in this is that the emphasis is more on the morale.