Originally posted by Anthony Lombardi: Turi -- for one, I hear these studies on the news and in newspaper. I don't read my news online so I wouldn't know where to show these sites, because it's not where I hear them. I hear it/see it on the news. I'm sure Geoff's link would be helpful.
As for the fetish statement -- homosexuality is not a fetish, and a sexuality is not a fetish, nor is pedaphilia. Fetishes may be developed out of past experiences or environments, but then again fetishes don't come from genes and sexuality is a big departure/difference from it.
The reason I brought up fetishes was because they are usually triggered due to a childhood experience and they help determine sexual orientation. Which means what you are attracted too. It may or may not be appropriate to assume the same for homosexuality – it’s just a theory but a well deserved one that deserves attention. JG, stepped in and made a good point also that NOTHING has been proven. That’s the main point of my original response. You simply can’t make sweeping statements that something has been proved with proof. You try that with an exam paper and it’s out of the window – fail. Sorry, but that’s basically why I can’t accept that sweeping statement.
You’re right Paedophilia is not, I repeat is not, the same as homosexuality. Anyone who says otherwise is an absolute idiot. But I feel some of the fundamentals of the development of paedophilia could be appropriate and similar to the development of homosexuality. For example, most paedophiles were abused as children. Again I am NOT associating paedophilia with homosexuality but maybe something with as significant importance happened to a person that helped trigger the homosexuality.
Like JG says though, for it to be triggered it may already be there (through genes). I’m just offering perfectly substantial critique
