Are you a paedo?

c_man

Well, are you a paedo? If you were, how do you think you'd handle it?

As a society we have to accept that such people do exist, and not all are acting on their impulse nor want to. I can imagine many being afraid to come forward seeking help due to the overwhelming hatred that society puts on it. How should we help them? Or should we? How would you react to a known paedo, who has never acted on it, living in your neighbourhood? The recent incident in Kildare shows how excited an issue this is.

Jesus Wept

This gunna go well.

Daledge

Nice try, copper.

RustyNut

Your not from Monasterevin OP are you?

Kimbot

This thread has been given this:

vicwatson

Just when you thought after hours couldn't get more ridiculous

sbsquarepants

Depends?

Ha ha, on what exactly? Sexiness of the kid in question?

judeboy101

Define paedo?

valoren

judeboy101 wrote: »

Define paedo?

A paraphilia, an atypical sexual interest in pre-pubescent children.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-dz68Jf58k

c_man

judeboy101 wrote: »

Define paedo?

An attraction to pre-pubescent children. Commonly used to refer to older children too though. Does that help? Can you now clarify your paedo status?

vicwatson wrote:

Just when you thought after hours couldn't get more ridiculous

What's ridiculous about it?

judeboy101

c_man wrote: »

An attraction to pre-pubescent children. Commonly used to refer to older children too though. Does that help? Can you now clarify your paedo status?



What's ridiculous about it?

Define attraction?

vicwatson

c_man wrote: »

An attraction to pre-pubescent children. Commonly used to refer to older children too though. Does that help? Can you now clarify your paedo status?



What's ridiculous about it?

If you dont see what's ridiculous about asking such a question then I despair :rolleyes:

c_man

judeboy101 wrote: »

Define attraction?

The process of removing weeds from ones garden.

vicwatson wrote:

If you see what's ridiculous about asking such a question then I despair

Well I guess somebody didn't read the OP. Shame.

Armchair Andy

Au pair reject you OP?

Jesus Wept

Armchair Andy wrote: »

Au pair reject you OP?

Au pairs typically 18 years min.


https://www.google.ie/search?q=au+pair+age&oq=au+pair+age&aqs=chrome..0j69i57j0l2.9537j0j4&client=ms-android-xiaomi&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8

Armchair Andy

Jesus Wept wrote:

Au pairs typically 18 years min.

In that case my uncle was a paedo :-(

harry Bailey esq

c_man wrote: »

Well, are you a paedo? If you were, how do you think you'd handle it?

I'm sure jim'll fix it for me.

Ficheall

It's innate, isn't it? Not being able to control who you're attracted to?
Acting on it is obviously completely uncool, but who you find attractive isn't really your call, as far as I gathered from the whole same-sex marriage referendum debate. Perhaps someone with more knowledge of more applied sciences can clarify..

harry Bailey esq

Just looked at the poll results,ah you disappoint.I was expecting most,if not all votes to be a resounding yes,with a handful of it depends and one solitary no. Anyways,time to cast my vote.

Ficheall

Also, from an old thread about putting people in their place:

PhlegmyMoses wrote: »

Was on a bus a while ago and a few scrotes, around 14/15, were giving some hipster looking lad a load of abuse. The chief abuser was as fat as shít and trying to show off to his mates. Anyway, he started calling the bloke a paedo - the beard and glasses probably gave him the idea. He started saying "I bet you want to ride me, don't you, you paedo?", to which the previously silent bloke replied "Sorry, you have the wrong person, I don't **** baby whales....." From the laughs of his mates, you knew he'd be hearing that for a while afterwards.

harry Bailey esq

judeboy101 wrote: »

Define attraction?

Gives you the horn? I've a thousand and one one liners about pedos from Jimmy Carr,I'm just waiting for someone to say the right thing so I can zing them. Watch this space.

Mrs OBumble

Ficheall wrote: »

It's innate, isn't it? Not being able to control who you're attracted to?
.

I'm told that its initially largely due to in-utero hormonal exposure. I don't have enough science background to understand the papers myself, but that the summary I've been given and it maked intuitive sense.

Nobody wants to admit it though, because that would lead to demands for pre birth screening from people who don't want to have a gay kid.

After that various things that go wrong during childhood can cause attractions that are undesirable.

As the OP noted, attraction and acting on that attraction are two different things - in people with any degree of maturity. Unfortunately there are a lot of immature people around.

lazybones32

My girlfriend asked me if I was a paedophile once. I said "that's a very big word for a 7 year old".

harry Bailey esq

I voted yes for the laugh. It would be good crack for an unregistered lurker to come across this and see that a large majority of the after hours lot are pedos. Ridiculous questions deserve ridiculous answers.Come on folks,get the yes votes in. It's worrying in fairness that somebody voted 'it depends'.

riffmongous

I notice the OP didn't answer their own question

c_man

riffmongous wrote: »

I notice the OP didn't answer their own question

I'm not a paedo.

I'm not quite sure how to best treat/deal with them as a society though. The thought of having one living nearby disgusts me on a deep level, and my gut says they're better off being "taken care" of a mob. But I realise that's a stupid idea, we have to rise above that. But it's very difficult for such an emotive topic.

valoren

One of the best things people do is categorise.
We have lists for everything such as below.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_paraphilias

There is another category that we can apply to that list active and inactive. Right and wrong.
There is no moral quandary about someone either shagging a car exhaust versus not shagging it. Live and let live.
But for some there is and rightfully so.

I would like to think that someone actively getting their sexual kicks from children (be it active personal abuse or through the exploitation of children, images, sharing material) would understand the inherent fury that would invoke in others not of that inclination and the untold damage it has on the victim. Unfortunately, a lot of people determine that their viewpoints, their actions, their urges are correct, and that other's are wrong i.e. that there is nothing wrong with sexual interaction with children etc etc.

A car exhaust, a post box or a pot of honey is not a victim. A child is. I am sure there are empathetic pedophiles who would never dream of acting on their instincts. But they must also see that some people are self-centred arseholes. And if they happened to be of that persuasion then they will no doubt indulge it.

Remember, that mob in Kildare, idiotic as they were to harrass that innocent man, were acting as such because they were looking for a 'known pedophile'. And that fact of the matter is you don't have that moniker unless you are Active.

vicwatson

c_man wrote: »

I'm not a paedo.

I'm not quite sure how to best treat/deal with them as a society though. The thought of having one living nearby disgusts me on a deep level, and my gut says they're better off being "taken care" of a mob. But I realise that's a stupid idea, we have to rise above that. But it's very difficult for such an emotive topic so I decided to post the question in After Hours.

FYP OP

c_man

vicwatson wrote: »

FYP OP

So what? For God's sake, every post of yours here is a "modding" attempt. Nobody's forcing you to read this, or be here.

punisher5112

No but thanks for axing op...

Mucky_Tackies

There should be a distinction made between peadophile and child molester. The former has not necessarily done anything illegal. They may know their feelings are wrong and dont act on them. But if we equate peado with molester, few peadophiles are ever going to come forward looking for help and we may be pushing them deeper. Repressed feelings then

Dont get me wrong- child molesters should be branded on their foreheads. But I do feel we should be doing better to address peadophiles before they act out and first step is ensuring the distinction between paedo's and child molesters is clear.

Agricola

His name is Peter File.............not PAEDOPHILE..................PETER FILE!!

Cee-Jay-Cee

It depends on how nice the feet are.

5rtytry56

OP ,with a thread like this You fit CLOSEST to that male boardsie persona compiled some months back.

congratulations

c_man

5rtytry56 wrote: »

OP ,with a thread like this You fit CLOSEST to that male boardsie persona compiled some months back.

congratulations

tHANks.

I have no idea what you're talking about.

Quazzie

I voted depends to even up with the Yes votes. Now the results graphs looks like a willy

Kimbot

Quazzie wrote: »

I voted depends to even up with the Yes votes. Now the results graphs looks like a willy

Genius

Birneybau

nozzferrahhtoo

Mucky_Tackies wrote: »

There should be a distinction made between peadophile and child molester. The former has not necessarily done anything illegal. They may know their feelings are wrong and dont act on them. But if we equate peado with molester, few peadophiles are ever going to come forward looking for help and we may be pushing them deeper. Repressed feelings then

Dont get me wrong- child molesters should be branded on their foreheads. But I do feel we should be doing better to address peadophiles before they act out and first step is ensuring the distinction between paedo's and child molesters is clear.

I would agree with that, but it is a position that I have seen often, including in a thread on this very site 2 or so years ago, that will bring the rage down upon you if you express it to the wrong users.

Many people think that, to DIRECTLY quote one person from that thread in question, "Being attracted to kids is enough to warrant removal from society." while another user on the same thread said "a paedophile saying "I promise I'll never rape a child" is just not good enough for me."

And this seems to be quite a common attitude to the whole thing. To the point that the latter user above seriously went off on one at any suggestion to the contrary. Telling us things like any pedophile who believes they will never act on it should therefore happily consent to "being monitored, boundaries set, restricted access etc. as a safeguard for when/if they ever have a moment of weakness or temptation."

So in other words merely HAVING such attractions, and nothing else, warrants Orwellian 1984 style monitoring of the individual for all time. You know, just in case.

You are right that this kind of atmosphere could lead to people not coming forward for help (though how you worded it sounds like their acting out is somehow inevitable, when I suspect the vast majority of people with such attractions never act on them). But I would add to this that they ALSO do not come forward for study.

As such when we are studying pedophilia, and trying to learn it's causes, roots, treatments and so forth we generally end up only working with the pedophiles we know about..... the ones with convictions. But that is an incomplete data set by far. If we are ever going to fully understand the underlying causes and roots of it, methods to treat or mediate for it, and ways to support people like that......... we need to study more than just convicted abusers.

Take for example some studies a few years ago which suggest that it is possible SIMULATED child pornography.... such as cartoon porn or CGI generated or whatever, actually has a quelling effect on many pedophiles desire to actually act out and desires or temptations they have. IF true that is very useful information.

But how do we test that? We need actual pedophiles with temptations to act out, without such temptations, AND convicted for those temptations to study to get as full and comprehensive a study group as possible. Are we going to get that with such attitudes around? Are they going to come forward for study openly? Some will I am sure. Many will not.

And for every one of them that abuses or rapes a child, there are likely NUMEROUS ones that never do, never will and never would. My suspicion is that the number of people actually with such an attraction FAR outweighs the number of them we are aware of by their actually acting on their desires.

Clearly finding a way to foster a community where people who have this can step forward and say "I have this, what can we do about it?" is going to help us not only deal with this, but develop ways and methodologies to diagnose where on the continuum people lie and to make informed decisions on who simply should be made to avoid all contact with children because they simply can not be trusted in any workable scenario otherwise.

But right now we do not have anything but wild, and wildly varying, estimates of how many people in our society HAVE such feelings and attractions at all. We guess a lot by extrapolating from vague numbers such as convictions and the like. But actual accurate data on pedophiles is so small that not only do we know little about them, we do not even know how many there are.

Barry Badrinath

Everyone calm down.

The OP is only 7 but he's single 'n ready to mingle. He's jus' lookin' fo' a suga' daddy 'sall.

vicwatson

Senor Fancy Pants wrote: »

Everyone calm down.

The OP is only 7 but he's single 'n ready to mingle. He's jus' lookin' fo' a suga' daddy 'sall.

Carrying on that way alright

DEFTLEFTHAND

I do have sympathy for people born with this deviancy and who don't act on it. It's the way they're wired and they can't do anything about it.

How would you even go about treating a person with such tendencies? Things like Conversion Therapy are pretty much proven not to work.

Persephone kindness

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

I do have sympathy for people born with this deviancy and who don't act on it. It's the way they're wired and they can't do anything about it.

How would you even go about treating a person with such tendencies? Things like Conversion Therapy are pretty much proven not to work.

I don't have any sympathy. And please excuse this I mean no disrespect you are very very naive.

dadad231

I voted yes for the craic like !!

ToddyDoody

I'll go with no, unless proven otherwise.

But I'm the type of person you just wouldn't be completely sure about :P

Thelomen Toblackai

Spending any amount of time around children is my idea of hell. So I'm going to say no.

Del.Monte

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

I do have sympathy for people born with this deviancy and who don't act on it. It's the way they're wired and they can't do anything about it.

How would you even go about treating a person with such tendencies? Things like Conversion Therapy are pretty much proven not to work.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=04clpd7h0b0

dadad231

I think the people that are DEFINITELY NOT pedophiles voted yes here

DEFTLEFTHAND

Persephone kindness wrote: »

I don't have any sympathy. And please excuse this I mean no disrespect you are very very naive.

You're right I probably am. I want to try and understand the issue better

I know that there is another school of thought that paedophilia is more nurture based over nature, as in there seems to be a correlation between abused children being more likely to become a predator themselves in adulthood.

Being interfered with in a sexual manner at an early age could have a serious impact on a persons sexual development. I find these cases utterly tragic on every front.

RustyNut

Senor Fancy Pants wrote: »

Everyone calm down.

The OP is only 7 but he's single 'n ready to mingle. He's jus' lookin' fo' a suga' daddy 'sall.

Is there not a catholic priest forum or something where he might get "lucky"