Rallying around a rapist

MrWalsh

LexieOnRale wrote: »

That "I was abused as a child" defence disgusts me. Just because it's happened to them does not equate to mitigating circumstances for harming and taking another child's innocence. If anything, you'd think they - of all people would understand how awful that is and how much it can destroy a person. Why would you ever want to make someone else feel like that?

Not to excuse it AT ALL, but it does happen and there is evidence to prove that abuse passes on through families and that some abused people go on to become abusers so there must be some powerful psychological damages at play that cause that to happen. I dont think its as simple as them understanding how awful it is and not wanting to make someone else feel like that.

In a country where a child rapist was thanked by the leader of a popular political party in his book, is it that shocking?

One eyed Jack

MrWalsh wrote: »

Not to excuse it AT ALL, but it does happen and there is evidence to prove that abuse passes on through families and that some abused people go on to become abusers so there must be some powerful psychological damages at play that cause that to happen. I dont think its as simple as them understanding how awful it is and not wanting to make someone else feel like that.

That was a long held belief backed up by retrospective correlative evidence though rather than causative evidence -

Causal factors

Causal factors of child sex offenders are not known conclusively. The experience of sexual abuse as a child was previously thought to be a strong risk factor, but research does not show a causal relationship, as the vast majority of sexually abused children do not grow up to be adult offenders, nor do the majority of adult offenders report childhood sexual abuse. The US Government Accountability Office concluded, "the existence of a cycle of sexual abuse was not established." Before 1996, there was greater belief in the theory of a "cycle of violence," because most of the research done was retrospective—abusers were asked if they had experienced past abuse. Even the majority of studies found that most adult sex offenders said they had not been sexually abused during childhood, but studies varied in terms of their estimates of the percentage of such offenders who had been abused, from 0 to 79 percent. More recent prospective longitudinal research—studying children with documented cases of sexual abuse over time to determine what percentage become adult offenders—has demonstrated that the cycle of violence theory is not an adequate explanation for why people molest children.

Source: Child Sexual Abuse, Wikipedia

sm213

Samaris wrote: »

Being attracted to children is a horrible, tragic illness that can ruin the life of the person who has it. It is far more common than we think from the looks of it, BUT many people with these attractions do not act on them and would never consider acting on them. That is the difference. No, we cannot and shouldn't just lock up anyone who has that twisted wire in their brain, but we can and should come down hard on anyone who acts on it and thus inflicts their mental illness onto innocent kids to ruin their lives too.

Thought crime = not illegal
Raping/molesting a child = very, very illegal.

But a lot of these people have probably looked at some sort of child pornography. Those children are just as abused. And that is illegal.
To be honest castration is not the best way to go. As you see in the article rape was last after the kissing etc. Which I'm sure is just as horrifying for a young child.
I'm sorry I can't feel pity for someone like this and do not understand anyone who can.
Would you feel bad for a mass murderer who proclaims criminally insane?
I would not. Id be happier knowing they were locked away. Same with paedophiles.
I have two small girls and the thoughts of letting these evil people roam free disgusts me.

MrWalsh

One eyed Jack wrote: »

That was a long held belief backed up by retrospective correlative evidence though rather than causative evidence -





Source: Child Sexual Abuse, Wikipedia

Interesting.

Mind you, my point still holds that we do not know what kind of powerful psychological damage is done in childhood to an abused child that could result in SOME them going on to abuse (Im sure there are many other factors also). I did qualify my original post saying it was some.

There also have been many cases in the media where "cultures" of abuse happen. The most recent one I can remember was some south sea island - Pitcairn I think, where child sexual abuse was happening on a large scale within one community.

Anecdotally I know of a particular town in Ireland where the instances of child abuse are way outside the normal stats also.

In short, I think that its a very very complex problem where we dont fully understand what causes one person to be a child abuser and another not given two similar backgrounds.

El_Duderino 09

One eyed Jack wrote:

That was a long held belief backed up by retrospective correlative evidence though rather than causative evidence -

Well of course it's retrospective correlative evidence. How could you set up a prospective experiment?

There is an unquestioned group think that child abuse is one of the worst crimes because of the psychological damage it does to the victim. Why then, would the victim's subsequent crime not be mitigated by their own experience.

This is the disconnect I find with this line of argument when people become exorcised about child abuse and want to crucify the perpetrator. If they actually cared about the victims, the dialogue would look different.

One eyed Jack

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Well of course it's retrospective correlative evidence. How could you set up a prospective experiment?

If you read the piece I quoted, you'll see that's exactly what they did with the longitudinal studies that followed children who had been abused into adulthood to determine whether the link was correlative or causative.

There is an unquestioned group think that child abuse is one of the worst crimes because of the psychological damage it does to the victim. Why then, would the victim's subsequent crime not be mitigated by their own experience.

It was actually the unquestioned group think up well into the 90's that led to the acceptance of a history of abuse in childhood as a mitigating factor in cases of adults charged with child abuse. That's why it became a common excuse, the idea that as an adult they couldn't have known what they were doing was wrong, because it happened to them.

If that were truly the case, there would be a lot more evidence of adult female abusers than males, as abuse of female children by adults is more common than male children.

There are many subsequent delinquent behaviors common in adults who have been abused as children, but abusing children themselves, isn't one of them. That's why there's a well-founded "group think" if you must, that suggests that sexual abuse is one of the worst crimes committed against a child, exactly because of the psychological damage it can do to a child. The research is there in the link too if you'd care to read it. I linked to Wikipedia because it was convenient, but if you like, I can produce reams of studies and decades of research for your perusal if you're still not satisfied.

As Lexie pointed out - it's far more common that adults who have experienced sexual abuse in childhood would never want to inflict that sort of pain and misery upon a child themselves.

This is the disconnect I find with this line of argument when people become exorcised about child abuse and want to crucify the perpetrator. If they actually cared about the victims, the dialogue would look different.

With respect, the only disconnect I can see here is unfortunately caused by your own ignorance. I don't want to crucify any perpetrator as that would simply achieve nothing, reparative nor restorative justice simply doesn't work either, and this is why civil detention is recommended in the States to remove the perpetrator from society indefinitely, because they can't be cured, or treated, or any of the rest of it, and even though recidivism rates for child abuse are the lowest of all criminal stats, it's still too much of a risk to other children IMO to allow convicted paedophiles or child molesters remain in the general population.

I'd be interested to hear how you think the dialog should look different though once you've actually done even a modicum of research on the issue of child sexual abuse.

Cold War Kid

sm213 wrote: »

But a lot of these people have probably looked at some sort of child pornography. Those children are just as abused. And that is illegal.
To be honest castration is not the best way to go. As you see in the article rape was last after the kissing etc. Which I'm sure is just as horrifying for a young child.
I'm sorry I can't feel pity for someone like this and do not understand anyone who can.
Would you feel bad for a mass murderer who proclaims criminally insane?
I would not. Id be happier knowing they were locked away. Same with paedophiles.
I have two small girls and the thoughts of letting these evil people roam free disgusts me.

I think the poster is referring specifically to people who have sexual thoughts about children - not people who act on these thoughts, including paying for child pornography.

Jayop

Serious question, is castration supposed to remove sexual drive or just the ability to do anything about it?

One eyed Jack

Jayop wrote: »

Serious question, is castration supposed to remove sexual drive or just the ability to do anything about it?

Physical castration reduces testosterone levels and is still practised in some countries, but chemical castration has reduced the "need" to do it, and there are other treatments like CBT therapies and so on, but there's no "magic bullet" cure so to speak, simply because of the vast amount of variances in motivations, methods and associated conditions with paedophilia and child molestation.

IMO, trying to treat paedophilia or child molesters is about as useful as conversion therapy, it just isn't effective, it doesn't work - it may have an effect in a minority of cases depending upon a number of factors, including age of the person, if they're a child or adolescent, treatments may be more effective than in adults, and the nature of their condition, the type of motivation, etc, but that's why I support their removal from society indefinitely rather than the risk of reintegrating them back into society following a criminal conviction.

Unfortunately civil liberties and human rights groups aren't too fond of that idea.

Jayop

Cheers for the answer.

Samaris

Cold War Kid wrote: »

I think the poster is referring specifically to people who have sexual thoughts about children - not people who act on these thoughts, including paying for child pornography.

Thanks, that is what I meant.

Look, no-one likes the idea of paedophilia. But I have read an account of a paedophile that claims he has never and would never hurt anyone, and has never acted on his lusts, would rather die than doing so. And I can only imagine how hard it must be for him that something that is inherently part of him, that is something he wants cured, is something he cannot ever speak about or get support with. I find sexualised child-like characters in anime a bit ick, but at least that sort of thing is not harming any real child. It is possible that that could be an outlet of sorts.

I do not advocate letting off someone that harms a child in any way. There's good reason why that is repellent to the vast majority of us. And I really do not approve of the very small group of disgusting people that advocate what they call child/adult "love". A child is not old enough to consent to sexuality and is not ready for it. But a paedophile that has never hurt anyone, that never -wants- to hurt anyone, whose brain is working against them...yes, I would feel compassion for them, and want to help them. More needs to be done to study this phenomenon, to help otherwise good, normal people who have something terribly wrong in their brains.

Cold War Kid

Yeah there are bound to be people afflicted with those thoughts, would never act upon them, and who would do anything not to have those thoughts and who would obviously prefer to fancy only adults.
In Germany there's a public health campaign offering treatment for those with such thoughts. Although how effective the treatment could be to alleviate such thoughts, I don't know. But if it helps prevent people from giving in to those feelings then it's obviously of benefit - to vulnerable children more than anyone else (ultimately the most important in this context).

Samaris

I'd say it can't hurt to have support and to know that you aren't the only person that feels like this - much like Alcoholics Anonymous. But it's such a little-understood illness that really, I have no idea what the recidivism rate is like, or how well such preventative tactics work.

lanos

MrWalsh wrote: »

Not to excuse it AT ALL, but it does happen and there is evidence to prove that abuse passes on through families and that some abused people go on to become abusers so there must be some powerful psychological damages at play that cause that to happen. I dont think its as simple as them understanding how awful it is and not wanting to make someone else feel like that.

you have just excused it.

it makes me laugh when people want to excuse something
they preface their comment with a silly disclaimer, then the inevitable BUT

it doesn't work

lanos

lanos wrote: »

you have just excused it.

it makes me laugh when people want to excuse something
they preface their comment with a silly disclaimer, then the inevitable BUT

it doesn't work

Big difference between excusing something and trying to understand it.

It stands to reason that a person who grows up in a violent home is more likely to see some degree of violence or aggression as not completely abnormal. And it stand to reason that a person who grows up in a home where rigid mealtimes are observed sees that way of life as being rather normal. And if a person grows up witnessing or experiencing abuse, then abuse is not completely abnormal to them either. Our experiences shape our perceptions.

I don't see any problem acknowledging those factors, while still not excusing acting on the impulse. Nothing is ever as easy as a person being 100% bad, full stop.

nxbyveromdwjpg

lanos wrote: »

you have just excused it.

it makes me laugh when people want to excuse something
they preface their comment with a silly disclaimer, then the inevitable BUT

it doesn't work

Explain ≠ Excuse

MrWalsh

lanos wrote: »

you have just excused it.

it makes me laugh when people want to excuse something
they preface their comment with a silly disclaimer, then the inevitable BUT

it doesn't work

No. I didn't excuse it at all. Your reading comprehension could do with some work if that's what you took from that post.

lanos

There is a fine line between explaining and excusing. I believe you crossed it. But that's just my opinion and nobody else seems to share it. However I keep hearing things like:
Not to be racist BUT............
Your honour my client was on drugs when he stabbed the victim, now that's no excuse BUT......

Well when it comes to child abusers, all bets are off. There is no mitigation acceptable to me. Neither excuses nor explanations.

Jayop

lanos wrote: »

There is a fine line between explaining and excusing. I believe you crossed it. But that's just my opinion and nobody else seems to share it. However I keep hearing things like:
Not to be racist BUT............
Your honour my client was on drugs when he stabbed the victim, now that's no excuse BUT......

Well when it comes to child abusers, all bets are off. There is no mitigation acceptable to me. Neither excuses nor explanations.

He didn't excuse the person at all.

It's a sad fact that a lot of those abused will abuse themselves in later life. In in no way mitigates what they do to acknowledge that and rather then burying our collective heads in the sand about facts like that it could be used by those who can do something about these things to try to prevent them from happening.

Targeted counselling and support of the abused with a mind to both helping them and potentially helping others in the future.

MrWalsh

lanos wrote: »

I believe you crossed it.

Well you carry on believing what you want.

One eyed Jack

lanos wrote: »

There is a fine line between explaining and excusing. I believe you crossed it. But that's just my opinion and nobody else seems to share it. However I keep hearing things like:
Not to be racist BUT............
Your honour my client was on drugs when he stabbed the victim, now that's no excuse BUT......

Well when it comes to child abusers, all bets are off. There is no mitigation acceptable to me. Neither excuses nor explanations.

Then you're purposely misinterpreting what MrWalsh wrote, which wasn't put forward as any kind of an excuse for all paedophiles or child molesters, but a plausible explanation for the behaviour of some of them. It doesn't excuse their behaviour, but it offers an explanation for it. MrWalsh didn't suggest at all that it applied in all cases, but in some.

There isn't any mitigation acceptable to most people btw, you're by no means unique in that regard, and posters above have put forward opinions and I have massive respect for those posters, I can't agree with them on this occasion even though deep down I know they're right. They're thinking more rationally about the issue than I am, and I think it's disingenuous on your part to wilfully misinterpret their opinions just to do what looks to me like moral superiority point scoring.

lanos

MrWalsh wrote: »

Well you carry on believing what you want.

Thank you

Jayop

In order to prevent things like this understanding the mindset and reasons behind it should be helpful in preventing future occurrences. That in no way mitigates it.

lanos

lanos wrote: »

Well when it comes to child abusers, all bets are off. There is no mitigation acceptable to me. Neither excuses nor explanations.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

There isn't any mitigation acceptable to most people btw, you're by no means unique in that regard

well i never claimed to be unique
i just said acceptable to me so as not to appear to speak for everybody.

Lawyers are constantly using prior abuse as mitigating circumstances.
and it must work otherwise they wouldn't bother.

lanos

Jayop wrote: »

In order to prevent things like this understanding the mindset and reasons behind it should be helpful in preventing future occurrences. That in no way mitigates it.

so we now understand that victims are very likely to become perpetrators.
but how does that help us prevent further abuse

unless we monitor little abused johnny for life, how do we prevent him abusing another child years after ?

Jayop

lanos wrote: »

so we now understand that victims are very likely to become perpetrators.
but how does that help us prevent further abuse

unless we monitor little abused johnny for life, how do we prevent him abusing another child years after ?

Counselling, support, properly punishing his abuser.

That's just off the top of my head and I'm no criminologist.

Cold War Kid

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Then you're purposely misinterpreting what MrWalsh wrote

Exactly.

I remember reading about a woman who tortured and humiliated her young son. She was physically abused and psychologically tormented as a child herself, and developed an alcohol problem early in life. It's extremely likely she abused her boy because of the above. To claim merely stating this is a way of "excusing" child abuse, is ludicrous. I still think she's an evil bitch, I still think she's responsible for what she did (plenty of those who have been abused *don't* go on to abuse their own children) but simply acknowledging what is likely to have shaped her behaviour helps explain what caused it, which should be done in order to try and prevent future occurrences.

One eyed Jack

lanos wrote: »

well i never claimed to be unique
i just said acceptable to me so as not to appear to speak for everybody.

Lawyers are constantly using prior abuse as mitigating circumstances.
and it must work otherwise they wouldn't bother.

Yes they are, because it's a commonly held belief due to the fact that people had previously used and depended upon correlative, rather than causative evidence in the past.

lanos wrote: »

so we now understand that victims are very likely to become perpetrators.
but how does that help us prevent further abuse

No we do not, because we've found that longitudinal studies present hard evidence that completely contradicts this belief.

unless we monitor little abused johnny for life, how do we prevent him abusing another child years after ?

There are a number of different approaches we can use, and it's not just little johnny either, but little jane too, but research concerning female pedophiles and child molesters shows that there are also different motivations and methods even between genders.

More research needs to be done, and as much as I would like in the immediate term that convicted paedophiles and child molesters be incarcerated and isolated from society indefinitely, it's really not a viable long-term solution.

NachoBusiness

lanos wrote: »

so we now understand that victims are very likely to become perpetrators, but how does that help us prevent further abuse

unless we monitor little abused johnny for life, how do we prevent him abusing another child years after ?

You speak as if there should be two different approaches, but they are in fact one in the same, as if you stop children getting abused, then there would be far less Johnnies/Johannes going on to repeat the cycle.

Personally I think humans need to stop describing peadophiles as monsters, as while metaphorically they may very well be, physically they very much are not, and as it's a physical world we live in, and not a metaphorical one, it might be best we speak about them in a way which makes them a little easier to spot.

Also, I can't abide when I hear people say a child's life is "ruined" and "destroyed" when discussing sexual abuse. It's a horrible thing to say and a I would suggest, a self fulfilling prophecy of sorts, given that children are pretty much all sponges and will without question pick up on such emotive language, and internalize it, exacerbating their processing of the abuse. I am convinced that one person I know that was abused when young in a rural part of Ireland was driven to suicide, not by what they experiences, but by how their family treated them and acted around them once they discovered what had happened.