Soldato
Would you sleep with the hypothetical 15.9999 year old?dirtydog said:
Our attitudes toward paedophiles.
- Thread starter ElRazur
- Start date
Caporegime
KNiVES said:
well arguably, it is very similar in respect to other crimes, i.e seeking out one less able to defend themselves, perpetrating an act, and gaining self fulfilment from it. this could be with a man, women or child.
i should imagine it would effect all of the victims in a horrendus way, not just the children.
and in relation to the 2nd part, your underestimating the impact and effect on the family of a murdered one - its a bit harsh to say, well they are dead so the crimes not as harsh. the fact is they have taken a life, and that persons family (maybe even THEIR own kids) will have to carry on without them...
Soldato
dirtydog said:
Did you miss a wink off the end?
Seriously, I couldn't bring myself to do it. (Mind you at my age I wouldn't with a 16 year old either)
I have some very strong views on this subject which as an attempt to keep emotionally detached i shall try to contain
Anyone that abuses a child doesn't only hurt them physically but they have to live with it for the rest of thier lives. It can destroy thier future relationships, they have i higher chance of abusing alcohol or drugs as well as self harm and suicide. all because some twisted person wanted to get off.
For that reason they should be locked up.
ok so i failed at being emotionally detached
Anyone that abuses a child doesn't only hurt them physically but they have to live with it for the rest of thier lives. It can destroy thier future relationships, they have i higher chance of abusing alcohol or drugs as well as self harm and suicide. all because some twisted person wanted to get off.
For that reason they should be locked up.
ok so i failed at being emotionally detached
Associate
Im glad to see throughout this thread a smattering of appreciation for the distinction between a ‘paedophile’ and a child rapist, however it is a shame this wasn’t carried out in SC; as much as I love one liners, personal insults and general ignorance.
I have to agree with the OP sentiments that there seems to be an almost fashionable trend to respond in a dramatic and draconian way towards this issue. Ask yourself at what times can you solve a problem by eradicating it from existence. Are we talking similar to HIV or the nazi-era jews? You cannot simply solve a complex problem by poking it with a stick, exclaiming you don’t like it and throwing it in the gutter.
Sexual deviancy is not an uncommon thing. Infact I have no doubts that many of you likely have some perversion or other that you keep to yourself as a taboo. Now imagine that that taboo rose to the forefront of your cortex and manifested itself into an obsession. You know its wrong, you hate yourself for doing it, but nothing can erase the feelings other than satisfying your own desires. I believe this is a position many if not most pedophiles would find themselves in today as vilified members of society.
From this point forth, the moral majority is left with two options; Incarceration or rehabilitation. The former is the current mode of thinking and effectively means that anybody who has these compulsions is doomed regardless of their desire for liberation. If you should dare to admit and confront your addictions you are sentencing yourself to a life of exile and imprisonment. If you don’t take this cataclysmic step, your desires can manifest into physical exertions within a very short amount of time. By vilifying a paedophile, you are effectively preventing them from getting the help that they need, that you need them to have and society as a whole wants.
I firmly believe the later option to be the appropriate way forward together with the correct distinction between a ‘paedophile’, its apathetic acceptance as a condition and the vile criminality of a convicted child abuser/rapist/murderer. Don’t forget many of those labeled nonces are respected members of society who never would act on their desires, are ashamed of their condition and would like nothing more than to stand up with a loud voice and ask for help. How can such a person possibly do this whilst you stand over them, taunting them, all because of a different mode of thinking.
I have to agree with the OP sentiments that there seems to be an almost fashionable trend to respond in a dramatic and draconian way towards this issue. Ask yourself at what times can you solve a problem by eradicating it from existence. Are we talking similar to HIV or the nazi-era jews? You cannot simply solve a complex problem by poking it with a stick, exclaiming you don’t like it and throwing it in the gutter.
Sexual deviancy is not an uncommon thing. Infact I have no doubts that many of you likely have some perversion or other that you keep to yourself as a taboo. Now imagine that that taboo rose to the forefront of your cortex and manifested itself into an obsession. You know its wrong, you hate yourself for doing it, but nothing can erase the feelings other than satisfying your own desires. I believe this is a position many if not most pedophiles would find themselves in today as vilified members of society.
From this point forth, the moral majority is left with two options; Incarceration or rehabilitation. The former is the current mode of thinking and effectively means that anybody who has these compulsions is doomed regardless of their desire for liberation. If you should dare to admit and confront your addictions you are sentencing yourself to a life of exile and imprisonment. If you don’t take this cataclysmic step, your desires can manifest into physical exertions within a very short amount of time. By vilifying a paedophile, you are effectively preventing them from getting the help that they need, that you need them to have and society as a whole wants.
I firmly believe the later option to be the appropriate way forward together with the correct distinction between a ‘paedophile’, its apathetic acceptance as a condition and the vile criminality of a convicted child abuser/rapist/murderer. Don’t forget many of those labeled nonces are respected members of society who never would act on their desires, are ashamed of their condition and would like nothing more than to stand up with a loud voice and ask for help. How can such a person possibly do this whilst you stand over them, taunting them, all because of a different mode of thinking.
Soldato
starscream said:Is there a difference between a 16 year old and a 15.99r year old though
I was about to ask that
I gota be more on the ball
Associate
Sorry I don't have the time to read this whole thread! But people are making pretty good points which is rare in GD!
Anyway, my 2c: My understanding is that paedo's are dangerous because they are predatory. There is no way (practising) paedophilia could ever be tolerated in society, yet paedophiles are drawn to children and even their chosen career leads them to working with children -some become priests and teachers for example.
On the other hand, is it their fault they are perverted? Probably no more than it's a gay person's fault they are gay. Like paedo's, gay people may keep their preferences hidden because they are afraid how society will treat them. On the other hand, gay people will generally not be destroying lives by having a relationship with another gay person, no more than a straight person would by having a relationship with another straight person.
In all three cases (gay, straight, paedo) there is no possible way to change the person's sexual orientation.
The result: paedo's must simply be kept away from children, or at least find some way to make them not be attracted to children any more. Whether this means locking them up, giving them some form of a lobotomy, or filling them full of drugs that stops them acting out their "nature", so be it.
Anyway, my 2c: My understanding is that paedo's are dangerous because they are predatory. There is no way (practising) paedophilia could ever be tolerated in society, yet paedophiles are drawn to children and even their chosen career leads them to working with children -some become priests and teachers for example.
On the other hand, is it their fault they are perverted? Probably no more than it's a gay person's fault they are gay. Like paedo's, gay people may keep their preferences hidden because they are afraid how society will treat them. On the other hand, gay people will generally not be destroying lives by having a relationship with another gay person, no more than a straight person would by having a relationship with another straight person.
In all three cases (gay, straight, paedo) there is no possible way to change the person's sexual orientation.
The result: paedo's must simply be kept away from children, or at least find some way to make them not be attracted to children any more. Whether this means locking them up, giving them some form of a lobotomy, or filling them full of drugs that stops them acting out their "nature", so be it.
Associate
This argument is ridiculous. When people are referring to paedo's, they're not talking about an age difference, or the old "I thought she was 16" argument. They're talking about people who are only attracted to young children.Stag said:
Locrian said:
Can i just say excellent post, well written and i like it.
fatiain said:
You added the bit about not sleeping with 16 year olds too, which is fair enough, but let's rephrase the question slightly: if you were 17/18—a perfectly reasonable age difference to sleep with a 16 year old—would you sleep with a 15.9 year old?
I understand why the law is arbitrary and clear-cut (it has to be somewhere) but I have no idea why people's morals have to be too, it's weird.
Soldato
In that situation I wouldn't sleep with a 15.9 year old. Not because I see it as morally wrong but because I might as well wait a month for it to be legal. Why risk becoming a registered sex offender for the sake of a month or so?robmiller said:
I think I understand what fatiain means. He's saying that having sex with a 15 year old makes you a nonce because you should respect the law. Not because it's morally wrong in all cases.
Soldato
No, I wouldn't. Not even in the last minute of the day before her birthday.robmiller said:
Soldato
Yes, and I wouldn't want to be labelled a nonce, would I?dirtydog said:Because of your deep moral convictions?
Permabanned
Fatiain
A: 16 year old lad sleeping with a 15 year old girl?
B: 50 year old man sleeping with a 16 year old girl?
I still don't understand how you can think choice B is worse when it is perfectly legal compared to choice A. when your arguements basically boil down to upholding the law?
A: 16 year old lad sleeping with a 15 year old girl?
B: 50 year old man sleeping with a 16 year old girl?
I still don't understand how you can think choice B is worse when it is perfectly legal compared to choice A. when your arguements basically boil down to upholding the law?
Soldato
Jesus, sorry for being different to you.robmiller said:
Soldato
No it boils down to morality.Stag said: