- 37 Posts
- 8 Comments
"My actions and choices - past, present, or future - are never to be recognized as participation in, or consent to, or association with, or acceptance of, any Masonic activities, any activities of a Children’s Aid Society or similar, any activities of a secret society, any activities of a faith-based group, any rites, or rituals, or superstitions, or any extra-judicial resolutions or inquiries.
Faith-based terrorism is pervasive in some modern cultures. That is, the intent to compel any person, by fear, to do or not do any thing, reasoned by ideological means, exists. It is and has historically been among the greatest harms of humanity, and is not prosecuted often enough.
It appears to have manifested on this sub-forum, and is unacceptable anywhere.
Individuals may separate their agency from association. That is, a person who I might recognize as a member of a faith-based group, presumably has facets of their life which are unrelated and unassociable.
…
Participation in Lemmy.ca/c/Religion - and interaction with me in general - couldn’t necessitate association with faith. I discriminate against faith, and people that don’t."
You are not welcome to message me.
Here are only two of the very, very many examples of Rudolpnus’ calligraphic signature within the Voynich Manuscript:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/93/Voynich_Manuscript_(32).jpg
https://i.imgur.com/gyO0YbP.jpg
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6d/Voynich_Manuscript_(66).jpg
https://i.imgur.com/qjEgHaZ.jpg
The response and attempted alphabet are on the first page of the manuscript, and were written in what I translated as Catalan, Corsican, or Galician around 2017, if I recall correctly.
There are claims that the Latin names of similar plants have been found within the script. That is entirely possible.
It is also possible that the script may be decoded in whole or in part into a language from the region of Malta around the 16th Century.
What is not possible is that the script is alien, or contains anything of great interest or import.
The Emperor was a fabulous occultist, but there are no reports of great wealth or health being found in his Empire. There is no Fountain Of Youth or recipes of chrysopoeia to be found therein.
armchair socialists: why do you read so much theory without any intention of taking action?
I’m not sure that I qualify as an “armchair socialist”. I generally don’t read much socialist theory, and am active through voting and other forms of personal expression.
No disrespect meant.
I doubt that. An “armchair quarterback” is akin to a “backseat driver”, in that they don’t have an opportunity to control what they are opinionated about. You are - perhaps rightfully - accusing socialists of being harmfully inactive.
By armchair socialists I mean: like you won’t go out to protests, wont try to talk to your neighbors about organizing etc.
I am not a shepherd, wrangler, or politician.
I am a democratic socialist. I am not a communist.
Socialists advocate toward - and not necessarily for - communism.
Just slacktivism like changing your profile picture to pride during pride week and posting on lemmy at best.
I don’t participate in socialist pride weeks. I am unaware if Lemmy is socialistic.
Yeah I get that a bunch of netizens probably have mental health problems, but I bet my life that other activists over history have had severe mental/physical health problems but still went out, at least sometimes.
I don’t have endogenous mental health struggles. That is far easier to ensure by abstaining from collective behaviours.
1·3 years agoDSM5 pg. 697
Pedophilic Disorder Diagnostic Criteria 302.2 (F65.4)
A. Over a period of at least 6 months, recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sex- ual urges, or behaviors involving sexual activity with a prepubescent child or children (generally age 13 years or younger).
B. The individual has acted on these sexual urges, or the sexual urges or fantasies cause marked distress or interpersonal difficulty.
C. The individual is at least age 16 years and at least 5 years older than the child or chil- dren in Criterion A.
Note: Do not include an individual in late adolescence involved in an ongoing sexual relationship with a 12- or 13-year-old.
Specify whether: Exclusive type (attracted only to children) Nonexclusive type
Specify if: Sexually attracted to males Sexually attracted to females Sexually attracted to both Specify if: Limited to incest
Diagnostic Features The diagnostic criteria for pedophilic disorder are intended to apply both to individuals who freely disclose this paraphilia and to individuals who deny any sexual attraction to prepubertal children (generally age 13 years or younger), despite substantial objective evidence to the contrary. Examples of disclosing this paraphilia include candidly acknowledging an intense sexual interest in children and indicating that sexual interest in children is greater than or equal to sexual interest in physically mature individuals. If individuals also complain that their sexual attractions or preferences for children are causing psychosocial difficulties, they may be diagnosed with pedophilic disorder. However, if they report an absence of feelings of guilt, shame, or anxiety about these impulses and are not functionally limited by their paraphilic impulses (according to self-report, objective assessment, or both), and their self-reported and legally recorded histories indicate that they have never acted on their impulses, then these individuals have a pedophilic sexual orientation but not pedophilic disorder. Examples of individuals who deny attraction to children include individuals who are known to have sexually approached multiple children on separate occasions but who deny any urges or fantasies about sexual behavior involving children, and who may further claim that the known episodes of physical contact were all unintentional and nonsexual. Other individuals may acknowledge past episodes of sexual behavior involving children but deny any significant or sustained sexual interest in children. Since these individuals may deny experiences impulses or fantasies involving children, they may also deny feeling subjectively distressed. Such individuals may still be diagnosed with pedophilic disorder despite the absence of self-reported distress, provided that there is evidence of recurrent behaviors persisting for
6 months (Criterion A) and evidence that the individual has acted on sexual urges or experienced interpersonal difficulties as a consequence of the disorder (Criterion B).
Presence of multiple victims, as discussed above, is sufficient but not necessary for diagnosis; that is, the individual can still meet Criterion A by merely acknowledging intense or preferential sexual interest in children.
The Criterion A clause, indicating that the signs or symptoms of pedophilia have persisted for 6 months or longer, is intended to ensure that the sexual attraction to children is not merely transient. However, the diagnosis may be made if there is clinical evidence of sustained persistence of the sexual attraction to children even if the 6-month duration cannot be precisely determined.
Associated Features Supporting Diagnosis The extensive use of pornography depicting prepubescent children is a useful diagnostic indicator of pedophilic disorder. This is a specific instance of the general case that individuals are likely to choose the kind of pornography that corresponds to their sexual interests.
Prevalence The population prevalence of pedophilic disorder is unknown. The highest possible prevalence for pedophilic disorder in the male population is approximately 3%-5%. The population prevalence of pedophilic disorder in females is even more uncertain, but it is likely a small fraction of the prevalence in males.
Development and Course Adult males \νιψ pedophilic disorder may indicate that they become aware of strong or preferential sexual interest in children around the time of puberty—the same time frame in which males who later prefer physically mature partners became aware of their sexual interest in women or men. Attempting to diagnose pedophilic disorder at the age at which it first manifests is problematic because of the difficulty during adolescent development in differentiating it from age-appropriate sexual interest in peers or from sexual curiosity. Hence, Criterion C requires for diagnosis a minimum age of 16 years and at least 5 years older than the child or children in Criterion A. Pedophilia per se appears to be a lifelong condition. Pedophilic disorder, however, necessarily includes other elements that may change over time with or without treatment: subjective distress (e.g., guilt, shame, intense sexual frustration, or feelings of isolation) or psychosocial impairment, or the propensity to act out sexually with children, or both. Therefore, the course of pedophilic disorder may fluctuate, increase, or decrease with age. Adults with pedophilic disorder may report an awareness of sexual interest in children
that preceded engaging in sexual behavior involving children or self-identification as a pedo- phile. Advanced age is as likely to similarly diminish the frequency of sexual behavior involv- ing children as it does other paraphilically motivated and normophilic sexual behavior.
Risk and Prognostic Factors
Temperamental. There appears to be an interaction between pedophilia and antisociality, such that males with both traits are more likely to act out sexually with children. Thus, antisocial personality disorder may be considered a risk factor for pedophilic disorder in males with pedophilia.
Environmental. Adult males with pedophilia often report that they were sexually abused as children. It is unclear, however, whether this correlation reflects a causal influence of childhood sexual abuse on adult pedophilia.
Genetic and physiological. Since pedophilia is a necessary condition for pedophilic disorder, any factor that increases the probability of pedophilia also increases the risk of pedophilic disorder. There is some evidence that neurodevelopmental perturbation in utero increases the probability of development of a pedophilic orientation.
Gender-Related Diagnostic Issues
Psychophysiological laboratory measures of sexual interest, which are sometimes useful in diagnosing pedophilic disorder in males, are not necessarily useful in diagnosing this disorder in females, even when an identical procedure (e.g., viewing time) or analogous procedures (e.g., penile plethysmography and vaginal photoplethysmography) are available.
Diagnostic Markers
Psychophysiological measures of sexual interest may sometimes be useful when an individual’s history suggests the possible presence of pedophilic disorder but the individual denies strong or preferential attraction to children. The most thoroughly researched and longest used of such measures is penile plethysmography, although the sensitivity and specificity of diagnosis may vary from one site to another. Viewing time, using photographs of nude or minimally clothed persons as visual stimuli, is also used to diagnose pedophilic disorder, especially in combination with self-report measures. Mental health professionals in the United States, however, should be aware that possession of such visual stimuli, even for diagnostic purposes, may violate American law regarding possession of child pornography and leave the mental health professional susceptible to criminal prosecution.
Differential Diagnosis Many of the conditions that could be differential diagnoses for pedophilic disorder also sometimes occur as comorbid diagnoses. It is therefore generally necessary to evaluate the evidence for pedophilic disorder and other possible conditions as separate questions. Antisocial personality disorder. This disorder increases the likelihood that a person who is primarily attracted to the mature physique will approach a child, on one or a few occasions, on the basis of relative availability. The individual often shows other signs of this personality disorder, such as recurrent law-breaking. Alcohol and substance use disorders. The disinhibiting effects of intoxication may also increase the likelihood that a person who is primarily attracted to the mature physique will sexually approach a child. Obsessive-compulsive disorder. There are occasional individuals who complain about ego-dystonic thoughts and worries about possible attraction to children. Clinical interviewing usually reveals an absence of sexual thoughts about children during high states of sexual arousal (e.g., approaching orgasm during masturbation) and sometimes additional ego-dystonic, intrusive sexual ideas (e.g., concerns about homosexuality).
Comorbidity
Psychiatric comorbidity of pedophilic disorder includes substance use disorders; depressive, bipolar, and anxiety disorders; antisocial personality disorder; and other paraphilic disorders. However, findings on comorbid disorders are largely among individuals convicted for sexual offenses involving children (almost all males) and may not be generalizable to other individuals with pedophilic disorder (e.g., individuals who have never approached a child sexually but who qualify for the diagnosis of pedophilic disorder on the basis of subjective distress).
You seem to be someone interested in information. I hope to provide.
From the DSM-5:
Paraphilic disorders included in this manual are voyeuristic disorder (spying onothers in private activities), exhibitionistic disorder (exposing the genitals), frotteuristicdisorder (touching or rubbing against a nonconsenting individual), sexual masochismdisorder (undergoing humiliation, bondage, or suffering), sexual sadism disorder (inflicting humiliation, bondage, or suffering), pedophilic disorder (sexual focus on children), fetishistic disorder (using nonliving objects or having a highly specific focus on nongenital body parts), and transvestic disorder (engaging in sexually arousing cross-dressing). These disorders have traditionally been selected for specific listing and assignment of explicit diagnostic criteria in DSM for two main reasons: they are relatively common, in relation to other paraphilic disorders, and some of them entail actions for their satisfaction that, because of their noxiousness or potential harm to others, are classed as criminal offenses. The eight listed disorders do not exhaust the list of possible paraphilic disorders. Many dozens of distinct paraphilias have been identified and named, and almost any of them could, by virtue of its negative consequences for the individual or for others, rise to the level of a paraphilic disorder. The diagnoses of the other specified and unspecified paraphilic disorders are therefore indispensable and will be required in many cases. In this chapter, the order of presentation of the listed paraphilic disorders generally corresponds to common classification schemes for these conditions. The first group of disorders is based on anomalous activity preferences. These disorders are subdivided into courtship disorders, which resemble distorted components of human courtship behavior(voyeuristic disorder, exhibitionistic disorder, and frotteuristic disorder), and algolagnie disorders, which involve pain and suffering (sexual masochism disorder and sexual sadism disorder). The second group of disorders is based on anomalous target preferences. These disorders include one directed at other humans (pedophilic disorder) and two directed elsewhere (fetishistic disorder and transvestic disorder).The term paraphilia denotes any intense and persistent sexual interest other than sexual interest in genital stimulation or preparatory fondling with phenotypically normal, physically mature, consenting human partners. In some circumstances, the criteria “intense and persistent” may be difficult to apply, such as in the assessment of persons who are very old or medically ill and who may not have “intense” sexual interests of any kind. In such circumstances, the term paraphilia may be defined as any sexual interest greater than or equal to normophilic sexual interests. There are also specific paraphilias that are generally better described as preferential sexual interests than as intense sexual interests. Some paraphilias primarily concern the individual’s erotic activities, and others primarily concern the individual’s erotic targets. Examples of the former would include intense and persistent interests in spanking, whipping, cutting, binding, or strangulating another person, or an interest in these activities that equals or exceeds the individual’s interest in copulation or equivalent interaction with another person. Examples of the latter would include intense or preferential sexual interest in children, corpses, or amputees (as a class), as well as intense or preferential interest in nonhuman animals, such as horses or dogs, or in inanimate objects, such as shoes or articles made of rubber. A paraphilic disorder is a paraphilia that is currently causing distress or impairment to the individual or a paraphilia whose satisfaction has entailed personal harm, or risk of harm, to others. A paraphilia is a necessary but not a sufficient condition for having a paraphilic disorder, and a paraphilia by itself does not necessarily justify or require clinical intervention. In the diagnostic criteria set for each of the listed paraphilic disorders. Criterion A specifies the qualitative nature of the paraphilia (e.g., an erotic focus on children or on exposing the genitals to strangers), and Criterion B specifies the negative consequences of the paraphilia (i.e., distress, impairment, or harm to others). In keeping with the distinction between paraphilias and paraphilic disorders, the term diagnosis should be reserved for individuals who meet both Criteria A and B (i.e., individuals who have a paraphilic disorder). If an individual meets Criterion A but not Criterion B for a particular paraphilia—a circumstance that might arise when a benign paraphilia is discovered during the clinical investigation of some other condition— then the individual may be said to have that paraphilia but not a paraphilic disorder. It is not rare for an individual to manifest two or more paraphilias. In some cases, the paraphilic foci are closely related and the connection between the paraphilias is intuitively comprehensible (e.g., foot fetishism and shoe fetishism). In other cases, the connection between the paraphilias is not obvious, and the presence of multiple paraphilias may be coincidental or else related to some generalized vulnerability to anomalies of psychosexual development. In any event, comorbid diagnoses of separate paraphilic disorders may be warranted if more than one paraphilia is causing suffering to the individual or harm to others. Because of the two-pronged nature of diagnosing paraphilic disorders, clinician-rated or self-rated measures and severity assessments could address either the strength of the paraphilia itself or the seriousness of its consequences. Although the distress and impairment stipulated in the Criterion B are special in being the immediate or ultimate result of the paraphilia and not primarily the result of some other factor, the phenomena of reactive depression, anxiety, guilt, poor work history, impaired social relations, and so on are not unique in themselves and may be quantified with multipurpose measures of psychosocial functioning or quality of life. The most widely applicable framework for assessing the strength of a paraphilia itself is one in which examinees’ paraphilic sexual fantasies, urges, or behaviors are evaluated in relation to their normophilic sexual interests and behaviors. In a clinical interview or on self-administered questionnaires, examinees can be asked whether their paraphilic sexualfantasies, urges, or behaviors are weaker than, approximately equal to, or stronger than their normophilic sexual interests and behaviors. This same type of comparison can be, and usually is, employed in psychophysiological measures of sexual interest, such as penile plethysmography in males or viewing time in males and females.
…
Here is a link to the full paper. ---------> http://74.208.31.225/scv/src/1571171090284.pdf
As a subject, paedophilia (both as a disorder and the material associated with it) is much worse than herding cats, and the consequences of this confusion are profoundly harmful.
A paedophilic disorder is a paraphilic disorder. There are many variations of these:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_paraphilias
A paedophilic disorder is ONLY:
"Pedophilic Disorder Diagnostic Criteria 302.2 (F65.4)
A. Over a period of at least 6 months, recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors involving sexual activity with a prepubescent child or children"
- DSM-V
“Natural” paedophilic disorders are exceptionally rare. By “natural” I imply a lack of “nurturing” causation, such as trauma.
On the face of it, I feel that this study was unethical. Participants were subjected to suggestions of children as sexual associates - an unacceptable harm in itself.
There has been a third comment posted here, and it is presumably by an individual I have already blocked contact from, a “meanmon” or similar.
If anyone wanted to present an argument against my assertion that the Pharisees being referred to as The Seekers Of Smooth Things because they were slovenly, then they would be best to use their words in a comment about the subject matter, and cite some reasonable evidence for their objection.
Thus far, I would be forced to guess at any possible objections, such as:
…b…b…b…but… DRHOY! What about IQH XII, which puts “smooth things” in greater context?!?
IQH XII, only solidifies my assertion:
“Teachers of lies… …Thy people… …and… …have led them astray… They have banished me from my land like a bird from its nest… And they, teachers of lies and seers of falsehood, have schemed against me a devilish scheme, to exchange the Law engraved on my heart by Thee for the smooth things… …to Thy people. And they withhold from the thirsty the drink of Knowledge, and assuage their thirst with vinegar, that they may gaze on their straying, on their folly concerning their feast-days, on their fall into the snares.”
The Chitsonim were struggling to recompose the Ten Commandments (which are the “Law”).
https://lemmy.ca/post/378226
The Sixth Commandment is “Six days thou shalt work".
https://lemmy.ca/post/365236
These laws were the only explicit “engravings” by YHWH.
The blasphemous abomination that is the replacement of the actual Ten Commandments maintained Sabbath observance, but removed the compulsory aspect of working every day that is not the Sabbath. This is a dramatic shift toward usury and sloth.
The Sixth Commandment had been important in maintaining the productivity and fecundity of a group composed of freed slaves.
In a broader sense of “the law” (lower case), the mitzvot had not yet been compiled, but all of Israel had been aware for many centuries that only the Levites were set apart from land ownership, and with that, the tithing expected at the compulsory festivals or “feast-days”. Those mandatory taxes were for the maintenance of the Temple and it’s services, and the sustenance of the Levites.
It is my opinion that the Chitsonim were composed of the righteous succession of the High Priesthood and supporters thereof.
The author asserts that Israel is being disinformed. This accusation goes further than one of misinformation. The assertion is that the “Teachers Of Lies” are aware of their falsehood, straying, and folly, because they are scheming to commit them.
The inferrable accusations are that the Teachers Of Lies have “schemed against” the Hasmonean High Priest (who ought to be the ultimate Treasurer of tithes), have neglected to provide knowledge, have substituted truth for corruption (wine is symbolic of Judaism, and vinegar is rotten wine), and have the goal of “gazing on” their foolishness.
This is expressive of condemnation for desires of lazy inactivity.