Court bans man with low IQ from having sex

azezil · 09-02-2011 07:33PM

pwd wrote: »

He has a mental age of 8 and thinks the stork brings babies.

He is not informed, and therefore he is incapable of informed consent. The judge decided this and said he should be educated so that he can give informed consent.

It's straightforward. It's a reasonable rational decision as far as I can tell. Not really a big deal; shouldn't be dramatised.

Why quote my reply, I just said it was a good idea to test people's IQs before they have sex?

pwd · 09-02-2011 07:36PM

azezil wrote: »

Why quote my reply, I just said it was a good idea to test people's IQs before they have sex?

lol I didn't realise I had

CrazyRabbit · 09-02-2011 07:42PM

For many tens of thousands of years, ALL humans had an similar IQ and we can assume that they were busy shagging like rabbits since we are here today.

In this particular case, get both guys tested for STD's & let them do want they want. There are little or no risks after that.

I'm thinking that Alan being gay probably had more to do with this decision rather than his mental capacity.

Eric Cartman · 09-02-2011 07:48PM

28064212 wrote: »

Ehh... date-rape? Drunken consent is not consent.

I always knew I was a serial rapist

Cheap Thrills! · 09-02-2011 07:48PM

He quite simply has a low IQ. That is the fact which can't be stripped down any further. 48 is probably less than half the average IQ.

What is the point in trying to find 'less offensive' words/terms for things that are already just merely descriptive.

These thing exist. Call it what it is. It's not offensive, it is however offensive and patronising to look for other terms/words to describe the same thing. He has a low IQ.

The fact is, as unpaletable as we might find it, that this man is not intelligent. He is not even average. He is not at all clever. He needs to be protected. This man will have trouble understanding money/time/crossing the road/cooking. Simple things most people take for granted. Sex is another things which is potentially dangerous for him.

It might seem Nanny state-ish but it was mentioned he was making lewd gestures to kids, so it's entirely possible his sexual reactions are fairly indiscriminate and instinctive. So it's obvious others need to be protected from him as much as he from others.

Buscuits · 09-02-2011 07:51PM

Cheap Thrills! wrote: »

He quite simply has a low IQ. That is the fact which can't be stripped down any further. 48 is probably less than half the average IQ.

What is the point in trying to find 'less offensive' words/terms for things that are already just merely descriptive.

These thing exist. Call it what it is. It's not offensive, it is however offensive and patronising to look for other terms/words to describe the same thing. He has a low IQ.

The fact is, as unpaletable as we might find it, that this man is not intelligent. He is not even average. He is not at all clever. He needs to be protected. This man will have trouble understanding money/time/crossing the road/cooking. Simple things most people take for granted. Sex is another things which is potentially dangerous for him.

It might seem Nanny state-ish but it was mentioned he was making lewd gestures to kids, so it's entirely possible his sexual reactions are fairly indiscriminate and instinctive. So it's obvious others need to be protected from him as much as he from others.

I doubt Kieron would agree.

Metallitroll · 09-02-2011 07:58PM

hahaha can you imagine if every person with low IQ were banned from having sex, we'd probably go extinct those i know with high IQ have social issues, usually misanthropes. the dummies with low IQ can appear smart, at interacting with people that is, enough to sell someone a 'good personality' and the rest is irrelevant. more thickos bang like rabbits/produce offspring, fact

Buceph · 09-02-2011 08:02PM

Metallitroll wrote: »

hahaha can you imagine if every person with low IQ were banned from having sex, we'd probably go extinct those i know with high IQ have social issues, usually misanthropes. the dummies with low IQ can appear smart, at interacting with people that is, enough to sell someone a 'good personality' and the rest is irrelevant. more thickos bang like rabbits/produce offspring, fact

Yeah, you keep telling yourself that. Smart people aren't sociable and liked, while stupid people are liked and are good at sports. Smart people all have bad personalities and stupid people have good personalities. Just like the fat girl is a lovely person and the girl who looks good is a nasty witch.

Or maybe, that's just what your Mammy told you to boost your spirits.

pwd · 09-02-2011 08:10PM

Buceph wrote: »

Yeah, you keep telling yourself that. Smart people aren't sociable and liked, while stupid people are liked and are good at sports. Smart people all have bad personalities and stupid people have good personalities. Just like the fat girl is a lovely person and the girl who looks good is a nasty witch.

Or maybe, that's just what your Mammy told you to boost your spirits.

Smart people use contraception. Smart people wait until they're in a good position to support and raise a child before reproducing. Dumb people breed indiscriminately.

The film Idiocracy is bang on. Check it out.

My plan is to breed a line of intelligent dogs who will eventually become the dominant species on this planet.

clln · 09-02-2011 08:21PM

on the upside of this if people with low IQs were banned from having sex all of Irelands TDs would never reproduce :P

Buceph · 09-02-2011 08:27PM

pwd wrote: »

Smart people use contraception. Smart people wait until they're in a good position to support and raise a child before reproducing. Dumb people breed indiscriminately.

The film Idiocracy is bang on. Check it out.

My plan is to breed a line of intelligent dogs who will eventually become the dominant species on this planet.

Why did you quote me before saying all that?

Eric Cartman · 09-02-2011 08:32PM

we can use this court ruling as a new test case , Using this as an example I have no found lists of people who will be declared 'Of too low an IQ to have sex'

1
2
3

Mr Benevolent · 09-02-2011 08:35PM

jackiebaron wrote: »

Keeping him under supervision is bordering on unconstitutional and satisfies my definition of unlawful imprisonment or even kidnapping.

The UK doesn't have a constitution. Not a written one anyway, which makes it virtually useless.

pwd · 09-02-2011 08:37PM

Buceph wrote: »

Why did you quote me before saying all that?

...I dont know...:(:confused:

bluecatmorgana · 09-02-2011 09:16PM

Buceph wrote: »

Do we have the right to ban him from driving?

actually if he could drive and pass his test then he would be allowed to drive.

LighterGuy · 09-02-2011 09:17PM

28064212 wrote: »

Where it gets truly tricky is people with equivalent levels of capabilities have sex with each other (be it two 12 year olds or two 'low-IQ' adults)

I know what you mean.
Personally, I think its right to have a law where if someone who is mentally capable (or... normal everyday person) has sex with someone who is mentally challenged, they get charged. In many cases it can be seen as rape. Cause the person mightnt know whats exactly going on.

but there lies a loophole of sorts. what if two people who are mentally challenged have sex. as you say. One can see the worries. What if they have a baby. Would that baby be properly looked after?

But then on the flipside you are taking away human rights. As although they might have low IQ's they are adults. They are people. I dont think there is one true side of the coin here. Its just what side you come down on.

But as for the story in question ... sounds like some homesexual pervert is having sex with him. which is wrong. Like this is a story of two men having sex. One who is challenged. Is the challenged man really gay? or does not know whats really going on. I think the capable guy should be charged. Its not right.

orourkeda · 09-02-2011 09:24PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-3CZYbIPCPo

Marcus.Aurelius · 09-02-2011 09:24PM

Who knows, maybe the partner is also of low IQ or borderline impaired.

http://www.jasonrivera.com/images/articles/20050130_2_199/motts.jpg

I'll get my coat.

PeterIanStaker · 09-02-2011 09:28PM

If they barred thicko's from reproducing, there wouldn't be any Z - list "celebrities" for us to laugh at.

clln · 09-02-2011 09:44PM

I re-read the OPs post again on this.
facts are people with low IQs are disrespected.
once they have reached the age of consent that is were the state should get lost IMO.

Parental support were available should be the guiding light IMO.
why should others decide to deny anybody having sex?
they have low IOs,but they also know what gives them pleasure and they have all the human instincts.the only issue should be contraception IMO.

it is a difficult one i know but the 'i know what is best for others' brigade should actually let people live the lives they were given.
who are they to judge?they/we appoint ourselves as what is best for others way too often! IMO.

Metallitroll · 09-02-2011 09:47PM

PeterIanStaker wrote: »

If they barred thicko's from reproducing, there wouldn't be any Z - list "celebrities" for us to laugh at.

but I don't find Nadine Coyle funny. nor sexy.. good thing she likes big black quarterbacks

PeterIanStaker · 09-02-2011 09:48PM

Metallitroll wrote: »

but I don't find Nadine Coyle funny. nor sexy.. good thing she likes big black quarterbacks

So she's going to end up on the Maury Show?

Metallitroll · 09-02-2011 09:57PM

PeterIanStaker wrote: »

So she's going to end up on the Maury Show?

i don't know. but if she decides to look elsewhere again, i don't envy the potential sucker. as it will be a big gap to fill

a gaping void, if you will

bluecatmorgana · 09-02-2011 09:59PM

Firstly the correct term for mentally handicapped is a person with an intellectual disability or developmental disability. Mentally handicapped isnt really used anymore and retarded is definitely not used. Also its proper to put the person first ie I work with people with intellectual disabilities as opposed to, I work with intellectually disabled people.

Secondly people with intellectual disabilities usually but not always have a lower than average IQ. They also usually have some kind of other impairment such as learning problems like speech problems, difficulty learning social skills etc. So a person can just have a low IQ and live a regular normal life, learning new things like everyone elso does, it just takes them a longer time to learn and they usually learn in a different way. At the moment I am studying about a man called Marc Gold who taught men and women with intellectual disabilties to make bicycle brakes and electric circuit boards in the 70s to show what people with intellectual disabilities can learn. Heres a link, skip the poem at the start: http://www.mnddc.org/parallels2/four/video/video44-tryanotherway.html

In the article the OP posted it says that Alan was confused about sex, it could be because they were teaching him in the wrong way. Sex and consent can be taught, even to children but we dont( yes I know what Im saying, the point is you could explain sex to very young children and they would understand the physical and emotional conseguences) so this gentleman is an adult and could be taught about these issues, its up to the psychiatrist involved to find the right way to teach him.

In my opinion no adult should be treated in such a way, it definitely violates his human rights and is an arachaic and , I ironically enough, uninformed decision by a judge that I hope is changed.

drkpower · 09-02-2011 10:13PM

bluecatmorgana wrote: »

In my opinion no adult should be treated in such a way, it definitely violates his human rights and is an arachaic and , I ironically enough, uninformed decision by a judge that I hope is changed.

In fairness to the court, it did order that the individual be provided with some kind of 'sex education' .... “in the hope that he thereby gains that capacity”.

If he genuinely had no idea what sex was, preventing him from engaging in it it probaby was the right decision at that moment in time. But I agree with the thrust of your point, that the vast majority of those with intellectual disabilities, with appropriate help, can develop the requisite capacity.

Rabble Rabble · 09-02-2011 10:17PM

bluecatmorgana wrote: »

Firstly the correct term for mentally handicapped is a person with an intellectual disability or developmental disability. Mentally handicapped isnt really used anymore and retarded is definitely not used. Also its proper to put the person first ie I work with people with intellectual disabilities as opposed to, I work with intellectually disabled people.

Whats the point in keeping changing these terms? Take one and stick with it.

QuimWedge · 09-02-2011 10:19PM

pwd wrote: »

Smart people use contraception. Smart people wait until they're in a good position to support and raise a child before reproducing. Dumb people breed indiscriminately.

The film Idiocracy is bang on. Check it out.

My plan is to breed a line of intelligent dogs who will eventually become the dominant species on this planet.

You been watching Linda Lovelace movie's?

I think she tried something similar...:pac:

bluecatmorgana · 09-02-2011 10:25PM

Rabble Rabble wrote: »

Whats the point in keeping changing these terms? Take one and stick with it.

Its because people keep taking them and turning them into insults. Basically society doesnt look upon people with intellectual disabilities very well and they are generally secluded and marginalised.

Cheap Thrills! · 09-02-2011 10:30PM

Yep. This fella ended up in a community home.

I'd have thought rather than ban him from sex, he could be better supervised and his learning about it could be closely supervised and supported.

The only thing that worried me was the supposed lewd gestures to kids.

Doesn't sound like his care-setting suited him, so I'm going to capitulate actally and maybe say this was the wrong course of action. But I do think he requires much better supervision and support.

It would be horrible if it turned out he was a danger to a child or himself.

ScumLord · 09-02-2011 10:37PM

28064212 wrote: »

Once again, replace 41 with 12 in that post. What's the difference?

One's 12 and the other's 41.

bluecatmorgana wrote: »

Firstly the correct term for mentally handicapped is a person with an intellectual disability or developmental disability. Mentally handicapped isnt really used anymore and retarded is definitely not used. Also its proper to put the person first ie I work with people with intellectual disabilities as opposed to, I work with intellectually disabled people.

To many words, won't catch on. Using more words doesn't make things go away.

Court bans man with low IQ from having sex

Comments