Our attitudes toward paedophiles.

[ElRazur]

Some of the UK's most wanted child sex offenders have been identified online.
It is believed to be the first time that details of convicted paedophiles have been published nationwide by Britain's law enforcement agencies.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6156712.stm

Banks and building societies have been given new powers to find out if their customers have been using credit cards to access child abuse images on the internet.

Police will now be able to pass on information on people cautioned or convicted of internet child pornography offences to the card issuers following an amendment to the Data Protection Act. Banks will then be able to cancel the cards and account used to commit the offence as a result of a breach of the terms and conditions of usage.

http://management.silicon.com/government/0,39024677,39160521,00.htm


Treatment..?

A number of proposed treatment techniques for pedophilia have been developed. Many regard pedophilia as highly resistant to psychological interference and have dismissed as ineffective most "reparative strategies."[37] Others, such as Dr. Fred Berlin, believe pedophilia can "indeed be successfully treated," if only the medical community would give it more attention.[22] The reported success rate of modern "reparative" treatment on pedophiles is very low

Defence?

These conclusions are in conflict with those of other researchers, who have found that pedophiles exhibit "many psychiatric features beyond deviant sexual desire, including high rates of comorbid axis I disorders (affective disorders, substance use disorders, impulse control disorders, other paraphilias) as well as severe axis II psychopathology (especially antisocial and Cluster C personality disorders)."[62] Beyond his criticism of clinical and forensic studies, Vogt 2006 replies to this that many, if not most studies diagnose pedophilia merely on the grounds of offenses instead of going through the effort of distinguishing the three categories of offenders via psychological examination and analysis

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paedophile


My view

First and foremost..please put your emotions aside and let's approach this sensitive issue cool headed and with clear mind.

Why do we have have such stance toward paedos? (I dont mean the word paedo in any derogaratory way at all). From what i have read so far, it would appear to be a condition of some sort which in my view i would compare with been gay or hetero.

If based on the amount of information at our disposal (some who could be true and other bullcrap for all i care) why do we still use such draconinan approach towards them? Aint this same stance that was used against homo years ago in this country and some acclaimed developed country too? Take for example the bbc link - it is wrong simply because ths people have rights just like you and me....they just happen to sufffer from a condition, it dosent makes then any different or any dangerous.

Why should bank be able to pull plugs on someone's account who is considered a paedophile just because the society appears not to understand it fully? Why dont we just apply the same rules to gay, lesbian, disabled and bald-headed people...You get my drift?

Are paedophiles dangerous? To answer my own question, No i dont think they are dangerous than a Hetero man having sex with an under-age person or a homo man having sex with a underage person (assuming all the under age parties consented to it) If anything, various research will suggest that they have preference for underage person but it dosent necesarrily make them dangerous....(not sure if you get my point there).
Lets not forget that if the age of consent is lowered there wont be paedophile reported case like we seem to have every now and then (i am not saying lets lower it). A paedo sexual preference cant be change, even though various suggestion for treatment have been made but all have been critisised - How about we apply such treatment to make gay people straight or lesbains like men? Which ever way i think we have a lot to learn as a society about paedophile and until then i suggest we use other approach other than stigmatising them in the society.

 

[Sirrel Squirrel]

I don't know about anyone else but I think in the worse cases they should be thrown into jail with all the murderers and let them experience hell

 

[^>Cas<^]

Do you have a kid?...Kinda answers the question you are putting forward...

Casmeister.

 

[Raikiri]

This is just because you want MJ to make a comeback isn't it?

 

[ElRazur]

Do you have a kid?...Kinda answers the question you are putting forward...

Casmeister.

Yes i do...but it dosent in anyway answers the question...You wanna shed more light?

 

[eddiemcgarrigle]

String them up by their testes until until they become eunuchs, then throw them in jail for the rest of their days.

 

[Scrutinize]

Are paedophiles dangerous? To answer my own question, No i dont think they are dangerous than a Hetero man having sex with an under-age person or a homo man having sex with a underage person

I think you could do with understanding all the details before you post an assumtion like this.

 

[The Mad Rapper]

I've been employed as a Forensic IT Analyst for the last 5 years. For the last three years I've worked Fraud cases, but during those initial two years I was a Sergeant in the Special Investigation Branch of the Royal Military Police, and 2IC of the Computer Crime Team. Roughly 95% of my case load was child related imagery offences committed by military personnel.

As far as I am concerned, a child's virtue is absolutely sacrosanct. Anyone abusing children for their own ends should have the absolute weight of the law thrown at them.

I am far from convinced that rehibilitation of these individuals is a worthwhile pursuit, because despite all good intentions and efforts, there is always the danger they will reoffend, and one child being potentially exposed to harm is one child too many.

 

[ElRazur]

I think you could do with understanding all the details before you post an assumtion like this.

I do understand the whole concept. People have mistakenly slept with an underage person (which in some cases the underage person looks sexually developed)....Does it make them a paedophile or dangerous? (hence why i said both parties are willing)

 

[The Mad Rapper]

I do understand the whole concept. People have mistakenly slept with an underage person (which in some cases the underage person looks sexually developed)....Does it make them a paedophile or dangerous? (hence why i said both parties are willing)

You can't mistakenly sleep with a child though - it's obvious. You need to consider the full age range of children, not just mistaking a 15 year old for a 16 year old!

 

[ElRazur]

snip.

I hear what you say but i can argue that looking at child porn is on the same level as looking at hardcore porn. It dosent make them dangerous or one offence bigger than the other. Lets not forget that this people have a condition that make the image of naked children something they like. can you imagine forcing a hetero man to look at homo porn, it wouldnt go down well.

Throwing the law at them or keeping them locked up forever is not the solution. I wouldnt mind if this is something they do as a result of their mind been normal it is more or less as a result of the condition they have...I cannot stress that enough.

 

[Psyk]

From what I understand from the BBC link, the names being released are child sex offenders. Which means they have shown themselves to be a danger to society. In theory anyway. It could be the case that their only offence was viewing child pornography. While it is illegal, and rightfully so in my opinion, it doesn't prove that they are dangerous themselves. And if they are not a danger then I don't think it's right that their details should be released like that. Obviously if they have a history of abusing children then it's a different story.

As for the treatment bit, I think it's complete BS. If you could treat it, you could treat homosexuality or any other sexual preference. You could even treat heterosexuality if it were true.

I think they key difference between paedophilia and things like homosexuality is that homosexual urges can be satisfied between two consenting adults and hence not a problem. However under age children (talking pre-pubescent here) are not really mentally mature enough to consent to sexual activities, so paedophillic acts are abusive.

The age of consent really is a line drawn in the sand but that line has to be drawn somewhere. It doesn't make someone a paedophile simply by having sex with someone underage. Most 14 and 15 year olds have physically matured so I wouldn't say it's paedophilia.

 

[The Running Man]

String them up by their testes until until they become eunuchs, then throw them in jail for the rest of their days.

i think he is getting at why this isnt seen as the answer to all crimes, i.e rapists, murderers, bank robbers, thugs, robbers etc.

"As far as I am concerned, a child's virtue is absolutely sacrosanct. Anyone abusing children for their own ends should have the absolute weight of the law thrown at them.

as far as i am concerned a PERSONS virtue is absolutely sacrosanct, as are our pets, yet the same level of angst is not felt towards any of the above...

 

[ElRazur]

You can't mistakenly sleep with a child though - it's obvious. You need to consider the full age range of children, not just mistaking a 15 year old for a 16 year old!

Personaly i wouldnt. But it happens. Do you see what some of these under-age girls put on sometimes? Let be honest, it would lure a padophile.

 

[robmiller]

I don't understand the hysteria at all. Their crime is an awful one, for sure, but they're treated so much more harshly than other criminals already and people still want to see it increased.

I understand the purposes of a sex offender's register (although I disagree with some of the things that get you put on it!) but it should be completely private—available only in the same way that CRB checks are done now. The idea of publishing lists of known sex offenders is horrifying, to me at least—it's a tacit endorsement of mob vigilantism and it's barbaric.

Edit: Also, a distinction needs to be made between paedophiles and ephebophiles. I have no problem with the latter (and believe the age of consent should be changed to work like the Canadian system), and yet it can still land you in prison and on the sex offenders register. Ugh.

 

[MrSix]

Paedophiles are known to abduct children and sexually abuse them.

Heterosexual people are not known to adbuct children and sexually abuse them.

Homosexual people are not known to abduct childen and sexually abuse them.

How can you say paedophiles are not dangerous?

What is your view on the man that raped a 4 month old baby?
How can you possibly ever pass that off as an "unfortunate illness" one which he has no control over. He had total control in that situation.

Their persuasions towards young children make them a direct threat. It is easy to come across pornography on the internet of straight and gay sex, that is because the parties involved are filming it consentually, most of the time for profit. Some people may feel pornography of any sort is immoral and degrading, but in the western culture of today, pornography is accepted as "normal".

Child pornography is totally immoral and obviously illegal as the children exploited either have no idea they are being filmed (voyeuristic 'soft' pornography) or they are forced to do things that are totally innapropriate and put through severe mental and possibly physical anguish (hard core pornography).

It is the child pornographers that are the biggest threat, as they are not only passive paedophiles, but they are the ones who make the disgusting material available for other like minded individuals.

Passive paedophiles, the sort that simply peruse images and videos, are not as much of a threat as they are probably content to relieve themselves in the privacy of their own home.

However why should you have a sliding scale for such repulsive behaviour? If there were no passive paedophiles, it would narrow the market for the child pornographers to broadcast to and theoretically reduce the number of people putting childrens lives at risk.

If you are to look at this emotionally, I can only put forward one question.

What if it was images/videos/actual events they were witnessing of your son or daughter that one of those people were pleasuring themselves over. How would you view those individuals then?

I doubt they would be the same mentally ill individuals that have exactly the same rights as us, as you described them before.

 

[MNuTz]

Are paedophiles dangerous? To answer my own question, No i dont think they are dangerous than a Hetero man having sex with an under-age person or a homo man having sex with a underage person (assuming all the under age parties consented to it)

A) please explain how someone, whether they are straight or gay isnt considered a peado?

B) Whether they consent to it or not, it is still against the law.

C) As for dangerous, not in the common understanding of the word, however fraud isnt dangerous either but they can still both wreck somones life, perhaps to the point of them considering suicide or self-harm. I could get attacked at knife point (well i have actually) and it would be considered a dangerous crime, however, the effects are usually shortlived. The effects of sex crimes last a life time.

We have a relative in our family who i was always told to stay away from, i never knew why until later but it was believed that he wasnt safe around children. Nothing has ever been done aboutthis man and i dont think there ever was any real proof either. However, he used to look after his son, his daughter, my mum and my mums cousin.

His son isnt right and has never had a real relationship. His daughter moved to Portugal 20 years ago and for no known reason killed herself 2 years ago by drinking a bottle of bleach. My mum seems fine with no problem but her cousin has had severe problems since she was young which has even included taking a knife to her breasts.

Like i said, we have no proof that anything ever happened, just rumours and warnings. However, for 3 out of 4 children to be effected like this i think its safe to say something happened. These are the effects that sex abuse can cause.

I don't understand the hysteria at all. Their crime is an awful one, for sure, but they're treated so much more harshly than other criminals already and people still want to see it increased.

As an adult you can at least defend yourself in most cirumstances, you may fail in your attempt though. Children cant protect themselves, they are innocent, we have to protect them.

One a peado always a peado, i doubt any of them will ever change.

 

[wordy]

My View

Peadophiles are attracted to people, who our society has deemed to young to make an adult choice regarding sex relations. They are considered dangerous because their actions could cause lasting mental damage to such children, this has been proved many times over and is why they are vilified in such a manner,

The arguement about treating them the same way as homosexual people isn't really valid as homosexuals are engaged in volentrary relationships with another person, the sex of that other person isn't really relavent if they are both above the legal age of concent

 

[Dj_Jestar]

Paedophilia is not a voluntary "condition" (I don't agree with it being a condition, it can't be 'cured' just like your preference in gender cannot be 'cured', but can't think of a better word.)

Acting, or restraining you actions to act upon those urges or emotions is what is voluntary. Unfortunately, as is apparent, some are not able, or do not want, to restrain those actions.

 

[vincent1989]

pedophiles = scum bags.
do society a favor and kill them all.