The Instigator
nightchanger
Pro (for)
Winning
5 Points
The Contender
themohawkninja
Con (against)
Losing
4 Points

Any form of Chronophilia should be considered a disorder and not a crime.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
nightchanger
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/17/2013 Category: People
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,625 times Debate No: 39072
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (2)

 

nightchanger

Pro

The first round will dedicated to a small introduction.
Whom ever going to join the debate. I salute you.

so explanation: I'd like to address anyone who has encountered the definition Chronophilia.

The definition is not yet complete and rarely is used.
So the definition the chronophilia that we're going to debate is :
1. Limited attraction to a specific age based state (Child, adolescent, adult...etc')

I'll call the age of attraction as "chrono state" just to clear confusion.
themohawkninja

Con

Hopefully I can find an actual link to something I heard years ago.

Well, first true debate on this site, and the first time I have done a formal debate in four years, so time to get back into the debating.
Debate Round No. 1
nightchanger

Pro

I'd like to welcome my competitor themohawkninja. Nice name BTW.

I'll open by why It should be considered a mental disorder :

Normal age based attraction have an unlimited preferential attraction to a chrono stage*, that's because In order to make sure the person can continue having a lasting relationship, the person needs to increase his age and does so naturally over time.

However Chronophilia unlike normal age based attraction doesn't change, which makes the person unable to hold the sexual base in a relationship for longer than the length of the chrono stage.

* I'm changing it to "Chrono stage" had a small typo.
themohawkninja

Con

"In order to make sure the person can continue having a lasting relationship, the person needs to increase his age and does so naturally over time."

While it can be said that most people do normally tend to stick within a certain age range relative to their own for the duration of their lives, it should not be considered abnormal (therefore a disorder) to cap the age limits universally in contrast to the "unlimited preferential attraction" which to state. This is due, in part, to the biological reason for sexual attraction.

Sexual attraction is there to aid the continuation of a species by encouraging the act of sex for the purpose of reproduction. If the would-be mate is infertile, than the courting mate would have no biological reason to mate with them, as no child would develop. It is for this reason that most of the worlds societies (Africa excluded due to the misrepresentation of how AIDS is spread) look down upon the sexual attraction to prepubescent children, as the male is incapable of pregnancy, and the female, while able to be impregnated, has a very weak reproductive system that has been known to tear in child sexual assault cases.

Secondly, at least one study has shown that the age at which women are found to be most attractive is 29 [1]. This coincides with the fact that on average, women tend to be most fertile between the ages of 23 and 31 [2]. Men are found to be most attractive around 31, while the age of maximum male fertility is around the early 20's [3]. The aforesaid reasoning about why human beings are naturally not attracted to non-fertile humans is also backed up by the ages at which humans are most fertile.

Thirdly, in somewhat of a contrast, the average age of a male Playboy magazine consumer can be as low as 18, while the mean age for the first online pornographic experience can be as low as 14.3 [4][5]. This results in an age gap, between the most fertile age and when humans (more specifically males) show sexual attraction of up to 17 years.

In conclusion, Chronophilia in general, should not be considered a disorder, because there are psychologically created age-caps for sexual attraction, which therefore means that there is a universal age range of possible, and logical sexual attractiveness independent of the persons true age. Also, even if uses the definition of Chronophilia as "one of a group of paraphilias .... in which the paraphile's sexuoerotic age is discordant with his/her true chronological-age , but is concordant with the age of the partner.[6]", Chronophilia still shouldn't be considered a disorder, because there is a 17 year gap between the age at which males are first exposed to pornography, and the age at which males find women to be most attractive.

1. http://www.allure.com...
2. http://www.webmd.com...
3. http://www.nhs.uk...
4. http://books.google.com...
5. Chiara Sabina, Janis Wolak, David Finkelhor, "The Nature and Dynamics of Internet Pornography Exposure for Youth," CyberPsychology & Behavior. December 2008, 11(6): 691-693
6. http://www.sex-lexis.com...
Debate Round No. 2
nightchanger

Pro

"Sexual attraction is there to aid the continuation of a species by encouraging the act of sex for the purpose of reproduction."

Agreed and let me expand to why it's supports my argument, Humans have a split cultural dependant form of relationship polygamy or magonamy [2][7].
In a polygamy based culture I would understand why Chronophilia doesn't need to be a disorder. Only in recent years magonamy became a norm In developed countries and should be spreading around internationally, and polygamy is being demonized and banned with exceptions of Islamic and other minor countries[1].
In order to have a good magonamy relationship both sides need to have sexual desire to one another.

In developed countries and should be spreading around internationally, polygamy is being demonized and banned with exceptions of Islamic and other minor countries[1].
In order to have a good magonamy relationship both sides need to have sexual desire to one another.
And as I said chronophilia stops it at a certain point.

Your second reason deals with the attraction to fertile people. It is considered normal and is not a Chronophilia because even when the people are preferably attracted to women in their 20s or men in their 30s the Chrono stage is not limited and does expand over time[3].

Your third reason I really don't understand what your tried to bring up. I looked it up with the references. Please elaborate what's your point here.

Now for your conclusions : "Chronophilia in general, should not be considered a disorder, because there are psychologically created age-caps for sexual attraction" Chronophilia is about limited attraction. Age caps that do expand and are not limited. Which The age caps naturally expand [3].

Your arguments seems to simply follow the lines of what is a normal sexual age based attraction. However we are discussing chrono philia. "individual experiences sexual attraction limited to individuals of particular age ranges"[9]

A better description would be the difference between exclusive (limited chronophilia) and non exclusive pedophilia, normal age based attraction. [10].

Normal based attraction would be :
1. A non exclusive Chronophilia preference to one age group or another.
2. A time based expansion of the chrono stage.

Chronophilic based attraction would be :
1. An exclusive attraction to one age group or another.
2. A non expanding Chrono stage.

So in my conclusion :
1. Chronophilia means a limited Chrono stage, not a preferred Chrono stage.
2. Chrono stages do increase over time.[3][10] to non chronophile individuals.
3. Humans have a preference to an age range[4].
4. Chronophilia becomes a great burden once the mate is out of the chrono stage.

Side note : We haven't touched why it shouldn't be a crime. If you want to continue the argument on that side as well, feel free to challenge me.

Links:
1. http://filipspagnoli.files.wordpress.com...
2. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...
3. http://viooz.co... moment 63:18
4. http://www.allure.com...
5. http://filipspagnoli.files.wordpress.com...
6. http://www.webmd.com...
7. http://youtu.be...
8. http://www.unh.edu...
9. https://en.wikipedia.org...
10. http://viooz.co... 52:40


It's been an honor debating you, may the flying spaghetti monster help you on your journey. If you're just a reader please comment what you think of this debate. Au revoir and have a pleasant time.
themohawkninja

Con

"It is considered normal and is not a Chronophilia because even when the people are preferably attracted to women in their 20s or men in their 30s the Chrono stage is not limited and does expand over time."

When one looks up the definition of Chronophilia from the source which you state, we find that the definition: "an individual [who] experiences sexual attraction limited to individuals of particular age ranges.", the term individual is singular, while the term "ranges" is used in plural form, therefore there are multiple ranges of ages that a individual can have to be considered Chronophilic. Therefore, a person with Chronophilia can start with one or two age ranges (say that of a teenage boy, attracted to the more matured women in a pornography video).

"I really don't understand what your tried to bring up. I looked it up with the references. Please elaborate what's your point here."

I was pointing out that there is an age gap, which intern could lead to a range of ages apart from that which the individual belongs in (that is to say, the 14 year old boy being attracted to females of a median age 17 years more than he is).

Therefore, the definition of Chronophilia as stated by your source indicates that there can be more than one age range per individual without limit to the age of the person in question, and therefore almost anyone's attraction would be defined by Chronophilia.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
P.S. I didn't bother arguing about it being a crime, because it would be illogical to say that it shouldn't be a disorder, but it should be a crime.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by wrichcirw 3 years ago
wrichcirw
PRO did not properly open. In fact, I didn't see PRO making much of an argument at all, since most of his rebuttal was actually a rehash of CON's argument. CON on the other had met BoP even though it wasn't his in this debate.

CON's argument seemed simple enough, "chronophilia" is not a disorder because age-based attraction is highly correlated to age of fertility. People below or above this age would seem naturally less attractive than otherwise. This is enough to negate the resolution.

I do not see where or how PRO argues that "chronophilia" should either be a disorder or not a crime. PRO's argumentation about the differences between polygamy and monogamy are irrelevant to this resolution.

I do not see PRO really arguing a substantive case. For this, along with a poor opening, I will score conduct against PRO as well.

S&G was rather improper on both sides. Two notable mistakes:

PRO: magonamy = monogamy
CON: intern = in turn
Posted by themohawkninja 3 years ago
themohawkninja
How did he have better sources?
Posted by tylergraham95 3 years ago
tylergraham95
I gave sources to pro as well for more relevant and accurate sources.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by wrichcirw 3 years ago
wrichcirw
nightchangerthemohawkninjaTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: see comments
Vote Placed by tylergraham95 3 years ago
tylergraham95
nightchangerthemohawkninjaTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: Con seemed to miss the point of the resolutions, and totally failed to disprove the resolution (he even admitted to not arguing one aspect of the resolution.) and presented only weak arguments regarding the semantics of Chronophilia. Pro seemed to understand Chronophilia better and the boundaries in which chronophiles must operate in order to achieve sexual attraction. Overall I think the con just somewhat missed the point.