HB, the point you seem to have missed is the part about control and agency. Children (especially with respect to their parents) don’t have any. They absolutely cannot protect themselves. Adults can. That’s the crucial difference. So yes, even though it may be hurtful to some adult who has a feeling, the child (who has literally zero control over what happens) needs to take priority. As a parent, I can assure you that this is true. Sometimes people need to hear painful things. Like “get help and stay away from your child.” That’s the real world. Sometimes the message is not pleasant. But it must be delivered, nevertheless. 

Teshuvahguy wrote on 20 Dec 2022 02:18:

I apologize if you got offended by the rant. I was very upset when i realized he didnt do anything but just had desire. Sorry for the intensity.  I'm trying to make a point that desires/feelings do not equal actions.


Can you explain what you believe to be the difference? Not morally. On the chances of someone not controlling their desires. I would presume with older people it is way more common. Molest is an evil no matter who what when how. By other desires we many times "moreh heter" ourselves.

Human being wrote on 20 Dec 2022 03:01:

Can I explain what I believe to be the difference? I have — in two separate posts. It has to do with the complete lack of control and agency that a child has versus an adult. That’s the third time im saying this. I’m not sure what you are not understanding. And yes, I am also passionate about this. A better question would be why don’t YOU see that there is no moral equivalence. That’s troubling to me.

Teshuvahguy wrote on 20 Dec 2022 02:52:

I am in absolute agreement with you here. Can you address the point we are disagreeing on? Why should we be protective at the expense of being, insensitive, hurtful and tell people things that may hurt them when it is not our place to diagnose them?. Again I ask you my question. How can we tell people to stay away from their child (AKA diagnosing them with pedophiliac desires) because someone with OCD would not be told to stay away from their child]  ) when we have no clue what's causing his desire?  maybe it is pedophilia, maybe its not. And desires are not sick or illegal. And 10 people thanked the post.

Human being wrote on 20 Dec 2022 03:06:

But we do have a clue what’s going on. The user has told us in his post that he is aroused by his child. That, to me, is a “clue.” And no one tried to diagnose this person, all anyone tried to do was suggest that this could be a serious issue and he should get professional help to look into it. 

So, if someone posts that they want to shoot up a high school, should we not suggest that’s a feeling that could be dangerous and he should get help? We should stay silent so as not to upset the person who has stated this?

Teshuvahguy wrote on 20 Dec 2022 03:05:

Yes i didn't see your other posts. I was busy furiously stabbing my keyboard here about to send out the next post :-)  I agree with you here. Yes a child is different then a grown up, because he has no agency. YES I AGREE WITH YOU HERE!!!

And now my turn. Do you see any difference between desires/feelings to children--that we should diagnose one who has this challenge as someone who has illegal feelings/desires, verses someone who has other sexual/violent desires that we shouldn't diagnose them?? Do you see a difference here?

I'm sure you'll be happy that i agree with you about the first difference you explained which is absolutely true.

There is an old Yiddish expression that translates to, “Don’t get into a sick bed with a healthy head.”  I think my healthy head has gotten into a sick bed here and I’m going to extricate myself and go to bed. We will have to agree to disagree on this. Have a good night and a freilichen Chanukah!!

Human being wrote on 20 Dec 2022 03:18:

I’m neither happy nor unhappy. If someone posted that he has the desire to violently assault his wife, that would prompt me to reply exactly as I did in the other case. Stay away from your wife and get help. The difference is when one expresses a general desire for something that does not directly imply harming someone he knows or is in his home. 

Anyone who posted a specific desire for something harmful to a specific person that he is “naming” would prompt that kind of response from me whether the target was a child or adult. 

Teshuvahguy wrote on 20 Dec 2022 03:11:

Of course we shouldn't stay silent. But there is no comparison to one who SAYS they WANT to shoot up a school (he wants to do a terrible action) vs someone who doesn't want to do an action that he desires. When i pass a woman on the street, i desire her, but i DO NOT want to act on that desire at all. Do you think "noselfcofidence" posted on a forum filled with 1,000 guys --that he has desires for his child --because he wants to molest his child? Why the heck would he post then? Seems like he was ashamed and looking to reach out, aka he doesn't want to do a terrible action.

And therefore, how can we decide that he's getting turned on because of pedophilia, when it could be OCD? (which is not uncommon) How can tell him that his feelings/desires ARE sick, illegal and he should stay away from his child if we have no clue? And please dont respond with "noone is diagnosing him" because that's not true. Someone with OCD would never be told "stay away from your child" "your desires are illegal and sick" On the contrary, they would be told to pick up their baby and stop being so nervous about harming them.

The equivalency in a case of a school shooter, is like telling a guy that owns a gun and is upset at something that happened at his school, "don't go near your school until your calm, because you may shoot up the school".  If everyone that owned a gun and was upset at someone in school would be told "stay home, because maybe you may shoot up your school" then there wouldn't be any children in school. Again same thing as before, A feeling doesn't have any equivalency to wanting to act on the desire. Desires we all have. Wanting to act on our desires the vast vast majority of us don't have.

I saw what the OP wrote before it was removed and it seems to me that he was doing actions, not just “being aroused”. I think all of you would agree that at that point it’s not just OCD and he needs immediate serious help. 

Gevura Shebyesod wrote on 20 Dec 2022 03:33:

If he was doing actions based of his desires for his children, then of course of course of course. And if he was doing actions, then every reply was 100 percent justified. But was he doing actions? did you see the post? I did not see the post, but I was told by someone who saw the original post that it was just desires. Maybe the dude made a mistake.

How can you assume that just because someone says he WANTS to shoot up a school that he actually would act on that desire? You can’t…but the prudent response would be to err on the side of caution. People could get hurt. Same with the guy who says he gets AROUSED by his child. Maybe just a feeling. But isn’t it prudent to err on the side of caution and suggest he rule out the possibility that this arousal could escalate to the point of driving him to act? 

Can we stop now? I’m tired. We have each made our points. I have seen what happens when you get started on something like this…I don’t have the bandwidth at the moment to further pursue this argument. Love you, though!!

Human being wrote on 20 Dec 2022 03:35:

Yes I saw it and it was quite shocking. 

Teshuvahguy wrote on 20 Dec 2022 03:36:

Yes we can stop. But i would like to respond one more time. WE AGREE THAT "a guy who says he gets AROUSED by his child. It might just be a feeling. But isn’t it prudent to err on the side of caution and suggest he rule out the possibility that this arousal could escalate to the point of driving him to act?"

But do you agree to the following statement? ----"We definitely should not rule it out, but can never assume that his arousal will escalate to the point of driving him to act. That would be for a therapist. And the reason its so important, is because telling someone "they must get away from their child can possibly have a very negative impact on him."

So we should never rule it out, but we should never make assumptions either as it can ruin people.

Love you too, i enjoyed the convo. I hope you did too.

HB, when I say we should suggest he “rule out the possibility,” I am talking about doing that with a therapist. So there is no difference between what we are saying. 100% it is for a professional to determine. However, we should suggest that the person investigate (with a therapist) these feelings. Also, though I do not remember it, I also read the original post before the moderators modified it and it was serious. Do you really think all these people on GYE (who are always so accepting and supportive—and were to this guy until his post in question) would have reacted as we did if the situation didn’t warrant it? Think about what you are implying.