Our attitudes toward paedophiles.

Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
8,444
Location
Leamington Spa
Von Smallhausen said:
I would disagree with you there El. Paedophiles' are dangerous, very dangerous. In the main, they are very calculating and can spend months, even years befriending families, more so single parents', to groom a child to commit acts that will turn the stomach of even the most hardened detective.
You're assuming that the only paedophiles out there are the ones that do this stuff. Clearly they are dangerous. The fact is there's no way to really know how many paedophiles exist because we only know about the ones that are dangerous. There could be millions who would never harm a child and just live with no outlet to their sexual desires. We have no way of knowing about these people because they are going to keep it to themselves.
 
Permabanned
Joined
7 Nov 2004
Posts
2,828
Location
Up a tree - where else?
Psyk said:
You're assuming that the only paedophiles out there are the ones that do this stuff. Clearly they are dangerous. The fact is there's no way to really know how many paedophiles exist because we only know about the ones that are dangerous. There could be millions who would never harm a child and just live with no outlet to their sexual desires. We have no way of knowing about these people because they are going to keep it to themselves.
Exactly! Punish the actions of those who can't/won't refrain from doing the deed. But why, in the name of God, punish someone who has these feelings but keeps them under control?

Consider this also: if that person would be prosecuted for having these feelings and not acting on them in the same way that someone who had these feelings and did act on them - what reason is there for restraint?

The same argument has been put forward as a reason for the penalty for rape being less than the penalty for murder - there's an incentive for the offender not to kill the victim.

But as Von says; if someone is going to spend that much time and effort on manipulating the situation into one that he can take advantage of, then that person has demonstrated that not only are they prepared to do the deed, but how determined they are to do it. That person is most definitely dangerous.
 
Last edited:
Associate
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
1,011
Location
Ireland
Psyk said:
There could be millions who would never harm a child and just live with no outlet to their sexual desires. We have no way of knowing about these people because they are going to keep it to themselves.
That's easily said but what if a neighbour asked the quiet, keeps to themselves, "wouldn't harm a fly" guy to babysit their child for a few hours? And what if the guy with no outlet for his sexual desires sits on the internet all day downloading child porn because he thinks it doesn't harm anyone? Sorry, Psyk, I have to disagree with you. Paedophiles ARE dangerous - it's in their nature.
 
Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
8,444
Location
Leamington Spa
tenchi-fan said:
That's easily said but what if a neighbour asked the quiet, keeps to themselves, "wouldn't harm a fly" guy to babysit their child for a few hours? And what if the guy with no outlet for his sexual desires sits on the internet all day downloading child porn because he thinks it doesn't harm anyone? Sorry, Psyk, I have to disagree with you. Paedophiles ARE dangerous - it's in their nature.
Ok well I was going under the assumption that said person doesn't download child porn either, since that is indirectly harming children. It's perfectly possible that someone is attracted to children but realises that child porn is indirectly harming children so refrains from looking at it.

You can't say all paedophiles are dangerous because you don't know about all paedophiles. You only know about the ones that are dangerous. My hypothetical harmless paedophile would probably refuse to babysit because he would recognise that he wouldn't be able to handle it.

Going by your logic that would be like saying I'm dangerous to women because if I were around some women I would have to rape them because I have no other outlet for my sexual desires (assuming they wouldn't willingly have sex with me which is normally the case).
 
Caporegime
Joined
19 May 2004
Posts
31,386
Location
Nordfriesland, Germany
There was a Montana man who was arrested for Paedophilia. He was middle aged at the time, and had never commited any offence before. It seemed that one day, he woke up and started fancying children, downloaded some kiddy porn and culminated in a sexual assault on a child (not rape). After going through the courts and ending up in jail he was taken to hospital after complaining of persistant headaches. When he went it for tests it was discovered that he had a brain tumour in the front part of the brain (in the area that controls sexual behaviour). After the tumour was removed, his inappropriate desires and actions towards children ceased. A while later they returned and he returned to hospital where it was discovered that part of the tumour they'd failed to remove had turned malignant and, once again, his actions and desires returned to normal.

Those of you calling for violent and abusive treatment of paedophiles, how do you think this man should have been dealt with?
 
Man of Honour
Joined
1 Aug 2004
Posts
12,678
Location
Tyneside
Psyk said:
You're assuming that the only paedophiles out there are the ones that do this stuff. Clearly they are dangerous. The fact is there's no way to really know how many paedophiles exist because we only know about the ones that are dangerous. There could be millions who would never harm a child and just live with no outlet to their sexual desires. We have no way of knowing about these people because they are going to keep it to themselves.

I am well aware that there are people who look at pictures etc and do not physically abuse children though. In my humble opinion, they are still a danger becuase there is that chance, however small, that they will cross that line from pseudo-image to actual abuse.
 
Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
8,444
Location
Leamington Spa
Von Smallhausen said:
I am well aware that there are people who look at pictures etc and do not physically abuse children though. In my humble opinion, they are still a danger becuase there is that chance, however small, that they will cross that line from pseudo-image to actual abuse.
In my mind looking at actual child porn counts as abuse since it is indirectly. I don't know what to think about pseudo-child porn. On the one hand it's technically not hurting anyone, and on the other hand I really don't want to condone child porn of any kind. So I'll leave that point.

But I will say this. Maybe there is a small chance they will cross that line, but there's a small chance anyone could cross a similar line. Watching violent films could lead to someone going out and killing someone. Very, very unlikely to happen but it has happened before.
 
Associate
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
1,011
Location
Ireland
Mr Jack said:
Those of you calling for violent and abusive treatment of paedophiles, how do you think this man should have been dealt with?
You're just after saying how he was dealt with ... the tumour was removed! The tumour in the part of his brain responsible for his sexual desires may have caused him to "fancy" children, but did it make him act on that attraction? Probably not, which is possibly identical to how paedos without a brain tumour feel.

In that case it all boils down to the fact that, like brain-tumour guy, they are responsible for their own actions, and because of their nature they should be considered a danger to children.
 
Associate
Joined
29 Oct 2002
Posts
806
Saberu said:
I find 14-16 year old girls attractive (not that i'd want to have sex with them) but that doesn't make me a pedophile.

I think you need to be on the sex offenders register mate, cant have you wondering around within any sort of distance of a 14 year old, in the right state of mind you are capable of anything and that is a chance i'm not willing to take.
 
Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
8,444
Location
Leamington Spa
Lithium said:
I think you need to be on the sex offenders register mate, cant have you wondering around within any sort of distance of a 14 year old, in the right state of mind you are capable of anything and that is a chance i'm not willing to take.
You serious?

If you are, do you go around raping people you find attractive? I would hope not.
 
Soldato
Joined
29 Sep 2003
Posts
4,326
Location
Not darn sarf
Lithium said:
I think you need to be on the sex offenders register mate, cant have you wondering around within any sort of distance of a 14 year old, in the right state of mind you are capable of anything and that is a chance i'm not willing to take.

Dont be bloody daft man. If a 14 year old has developed hips and breasts sure your going to find them sexually attractive. :confused:

So by the same token if i see a women walking down the street, and well my thoughts run away a bit. That makes me a rapist?

Lithium said:
pedos, homos, murderers, whats the difference?

Last I heard being homosexual isnt illegal thats the difference.
 
Last edited:
Associate
Joined
29 Oct 2002
Posts
806
Edinho said:
Dont be bloody daft man. If a 14 year old has developed hips and breasts sure your going to find them sexually attractive. :confused:

So by the same token if i see a women walking down the street, and well my thoughts run away a bit. That makes me a rapist?

What the hell? I damn sure know a 14 year old when i see it and i can assure you i do not find it attractive. You are disgusting.

In my opinion teenage sex happens, but that happens between teenagers. (im talking 15,16,17....)

Soon as a grown man starts talking about having sex with teenagers and finding 14 year old girls attractive its most definitely on the road to pedophilia.
 
Soldato
Joined
1 Sep 2003
Posts
5,949
Location
Redcar
Lithium said:
Soon as a grown man starts talking about having sex with teenagers and finding 14 year old girls attractive its most definitely on the road to pedophilia.

So by that logic someone who in anger wishes someone was dead in their mind is on the road to becoming a murderer!?
 
Permabanned
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
47,396
Location
Essex
Lithium said:
What the hell? I damn sure know a 14 year old when i see it and i can assure you i do not find it attractive. You are disgusting.

In my opinion teenage sex happens, but that happens between teenagers. (im talking 15,16,17....)

Soon as a grown man starts talking about having sex with teenagers and finding 14 year old girls attractive its most definitely on the road to pedophilia.
How old are you, out of interest - to help put your views into context.
 
Soldato
Joined
28 Oct 2002
Posts
5,014
tenchi-fan said:
You're just after saying how he was dealt with ... the tumour was removed! The tumour in the part of his brain responsible for his sexual desires may have caused him to "fancy" children, but did it make him act on that attraction? Probably not......
Actually it did, he was unable to restrain himself from behaviour he was feeling compelled to, but knew was wrong.
Article here: http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn2943
 
Back
Top Bottom