As I said earlier, maybe you should look in the mirror.. self-righteousness is an ugly thing, and I guess it's hard ...
Do Pedophiles deserve sympathy?
by purplesofa 149 Replies latest members adult
-
-
yadda yadda 2
This fallacious research is wicked nonsense. They deserve no sympathy whatsoever, they only deserve a bullet between the eyes. We live in this uber politically correct Society where we must understand and have sympathy for evil perpetrators. its the age where the perpetrator is viewed as a victim just as much as the victim. I can't believe the nauseating comments on this thread. Next we will see threads on whether Hitler and Pol Pot deserve our sympathy.
-
Qcmbr
Yadda - I don't think anyone is downplaying the agreement that this is abhorrent behaviour. Would you still want the simple punish route if the net effect of that was to increase overall child abuse? If however, we treated it as a natural part of the human condition that we should strive to overcome with every means at our disposal ( from basic media control through to chemical castration as treatment rather and then onto criminal justice ) and the net effect was less child abuse at the cost of less punishment would that be acceptable?
If someone abused my child I suspect the horror would render my only desired response immediate and swift violent retribution. I would no longer have a desire to rehabilitate or understand I think. My personal rage would render me less capable of seeing the long term benefits of considered action because the benefits would accrue for other children who naturally evoke less of an emotive and paternal defence response than my own children.
-
soft+gentle
qcmr - I so agree with you.
Pedophilia needs to be de-mystified. Isolation has disasterous consequences. I also agree about the selection process (post 2854).
-
AGuest
Well, I did my usual line-by-line response, dear Tal (peace to you!)... and even linked a site that speaks to what I stated. NOT that all or even most abused children become child abusers - never said that nor implied it - but that some do. Perhaps I should have stated that victims become offenders "all too often," versus the situation being "all too common." That YOU used the word "often" (when I didn't makes me wonder whether you understood what I meant but have, for some reason unknown to me, chosen to pcik yet another fight). Because that is what I meant. That I used one wrong word (and did so intentionally, because I was trying to make a point) doesn't mean they do very often, not even most of the time.
Doesn't matter, though. Because your comment that "ignorant people, like yourself, think that because *they* (an abused child) were abused, they are just as sick as their abusers" is not only such a misstatement of what I stated and believe... but risks someone here who may have been abused think I DO think and believe such (when nothing is further from the truth)... I am going to end here... and let it go. This is not a thread I wish to hash this with you on... and since you don't want to take to a more benign thread, I have to be done.
Please know, however, that I respect your expertise and only meant to state that WHEN such is the case, WHEN an abuser was the victim of abuse himself/herself, in that instance I can raise a "drop" of sympathy. I get it that some here don't believe there is any situation where an abuser "deserves" sympathy... and that belief is perfectly right... and alright... for them. I disagree. Not much... but since I can't agree 100%, I have to respectfully disagree. And because I was a victim of child abuse, I think that is perfectly right... and alright... for me.
I hope you can receive that; however, if you can't I do understand... and I still wish you peace.
A slave of Christ,
SA, who apparently is finally in agreement with dear Q (peace!) on something...
-
soft+gentle
aguest - I gotcha. you are not saying that all victims are naturally predisposed to abuse but that it is common amongst offenders that they were abused as children (however that not all offenders were abused as children themselves). Or that a small percentage of victims go on to abuse others themselves.
Imo in the past this did give all victims a bad name until studies began to focus on the huge numbers who had been abused but did not go on to abuse.
-
Snoozy
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-20005370-504083.html
NEW YORK (CBS) Douglas R. Hughes, a dark horse candidate in the California governor's race, has a grand idea for the state's convicted pedophiles... give them an island.
"As your governor, my number one promise to you is to remove all pedophiles from the State of California," Hughes says on his website.
If elected, he says he would give pedophiles three choices after completing their jail terms: leave the state, stay in jail for life, or learn to ranch and farm on beautiful Santa Rosa Island, which he says is currently only visited by "park rangers and environmentalists."
His website reads like a Phillip K. Dick novel, packed with ideas on how the self-contained island society would form.
"The first of pedophiles to go to the island would be a lead team for 'their society' such as police, fire personnel, judges, fish and game agents, forest rangers, ranchers, farmers, building contractors, surveyors, and the like to establish the 'island community,'" he writes. "This lead team will be responsible for creating a master plan for the 'Island.'"
And Hughes actually makes island life sound sort of idyllic: "This 'Island' will represent a way of life that has long since been forgotten: one in which our forefathers came to this land with a wagon, some animals, seed, and tools, looking for water and land to build their lives around."
Sounds pretty good, except for all the pedophiles running around.
In Hughes' plan, the pedophile island is sort of a throwback to a more earnest time in American history. The pedophiles would be settlers of a certain sort. But there's a catch. Once you move to the pedophile island you can never leave. You are a "citizen" for life.
Oh and one other rule. No kids allowed
-
Jeffro
yadda yadda 2:
Next we will see threads on whether Hitler and Pol Pot deserve our sympathy.
Godwin's law strikes again.
-
Snoozy
http://www.criminal-law-lawyer-source.com/terms/pedophile.html
Long but interesting, I thought it was always about sex..not according to this:
Quote:
A pedophile is an individual whose primary sexual orientation is for children. Quite literally the word pedophilia means love ("-philia") for children ("pedo-"). In the field of psychology, a pedophile is considered to have paraphilia, or a psychosexual disorder. In the field of law, a pedophile is not a criminal unless s/he acts on their desires for children. When a pedophile does act on his or her feelings or desires, they may be committing acts of child sexual abuse or molestation, child exploitation, child pornography, incest, kidnapping, statutory rape, or the prostitution of minors.There is no definitive profile of a pedophile, as individual characteristics can vary significantly. A pedophile can be a man or a woman. Of those pedophiles that commit unlawful acts involving children, the perpetrator is much more likely to be a man (80-90 percent) than a woman (10-20 percent). A pedophile may be a trustworthy and respectable adult in the community, who shows no outward signs of their condition to others.
A pedophile often prefers the company of children to the company of adults and desires time spent with children doing child-appropriate activities. A pedophile may be married to, or date people who have children in their desired age range. A pedophile may have been the victim of sexual abuse themselves as a child. A pedophile may derive satisfaction from children in a number of ways: some stop at looking, others take pictures and watch children, and still others require more contact to satisfy their desires.
Any sexual act that involves a minor and an adult is unlawful. Individuals who are below the age of consent are considered by the law to be unable to give consent to any type of sexual activity (NEW INFO TO ME) It is commonly believed that any person who molests a child is a pedophile and that is not always true. According to research, only two to ten percent of all child molesters are pedophiles in the true definition of the word. The majority of child molesters are situational offenders whose motives and desires are different than those of a pedophile. Regardless of motive or offender characteristics (pedophile or not), any act committed by an adult or older child that is sexual in nature and involves children is an illegal felony offense. (END OF NEW INFO)
A pedophile will typically not stop their behavior on their own, will not turn themselves in and will not take responsibility for or acknowledge their own wrongdoing. A true pedophile can be treated but not cured of their condition. A pedophile who commits any sexual act involving children can be charged with a felony crime and face years of prison time, heavy fines, and other penalties. A convicted pedophile is required to register with a sex offender registry upon release from incarceration and must do so for the rest of their lives in most cases.
A sex offender registry provides information to the public about sex offenders who live, work, or otherwise reside in their communities. This registry requirement is mandated by a federal law known as Megan's Law which was passed in 1996. (End of quote).
Snoozy
***edited to add:
One comment I also don't agree with..
Quote:A pedophile often prefers the company of children to the company of adults and desires time spent with children doing child-appropriate activities. A pedophile may be married to, or date people who have children in their desired age range. A pedophile may have been the victim of sexual abuse themselves as a child. A pedophile may derive satisfaction from children in a number of ways: some stop at looking, others take pictures and watch children, and still others require more contact to satisfy their desires.(end of quote)
I think sometimes they put on an act that they can't stand children to keep suspicion from falling on them.
Snoozy again
-
AGuest
Imo in the past this did give all victims a bad name until studies began to focus on the huge numbers who had been abused but did not go on to abuse.
Yes, I understand, dear S+G (peace to you!)... and that what not my intention or position, so thank you for understanding what I stated. I think that fact that we, as a society, don'tsend a message to those who have not abused that it's okay to come out [to a professional] and get help is part of what keeps it underground... until some child is abused. Just some of the comments here scare the bejeezus out of me - I can't imagine anyone with concerning urges even risking trying to talk to anyone about it - I mean, you just never know who might have it in for you and why (abuse victim, parent/sibling of an abuse victim, someone who believes a "pedophile" deserves no mercy... even if they've never abused anyone in their entire life...).
Do you think there's ever come a time when folks understand that just like being an abuse victim doesn't mean one is/will be an abuser, being a pedophile doesn't mean one is/will be an abuser? I mean, I think that's what the article... and most medical journals... seem to be saying. Doesn't look like it will happen any time soon.
Again, thank you... and peace to you!
A slave of Christ,
SA
