Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

So many Child Molestation stories.

13»

Comments

  • #62
    clairefontaine
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,390 ✭✭✭clairefontaine


    The FBI statistics are that most child molestors are heterosexual males. You are all off the track with calling them pedophiles.

    Some are situational and opportunistic and others have preferential targets. Most assaults are done by acquaintances of the child.

    It's usually by adults who can only relate to children.

    As for this recent psychopath not the other thread, he is in a realm of evil all of his own.


  • #63
    my teapot is orange
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 313 ✭✭my teapot is orange


    StompToWork wrote: »
    At this stage, I think we can probably say that there is a quantifiable percentage (albeit extremely small, thankfully) of the human population who appear to have pedophile tendencies.

    Unfortunately I'm not confident it is extremely small. The one in four charity say that that number have experienced sexual abuse, and presumably a fair amount of this will be in childhood when they are vulnerable rather than as adults who are more likely (though not always) to stand up for themselves.


  • #64
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 12,694 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    KyussBishop wrote: »
    That's a completely arbitrary definition of mental illness - people are harmed by child abuse, not by paedophilia itself. Paedophilia's as a whole, have been a strong point of debate for removal from the DSM altogether, and the DSM is garnering less and less credibility upon each new release.

    It's simple: Paedophile does not equal child abuser/rapist. As abhorrent as the thoughts are, you can't make thoughts a crime either, as that sets a very dangerous legal precedent - you do however, want the right conditions to be able to find who is at risk of acting on their urges or not, and preventing that, and that requires a society where people can seek help for their issues without stigma (primarily without legal stigma, as the societal stigma is likely to stay).

    I've already made my position clear that it's not something I view as acceptable, so I'm going to get extremely snippy/blunt if words get put in my mouth or implied about that, over a topic this controversial, so make sure to ask instead of assume, when it comes to my views.


    The problem with your post is that you are more concerned about the fact that paedophilia is considered a mental illness and that could be stigmatising of mental health issues in general, you want to ignore all evidence so you can make what you believe fit an ideology that says lots of mental illness don't exist they are socially constructed.


  • #65
    KyussBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭KyussBishop


    mariaalice wrote: »
    The problem with your post is that you are more concerned about the fact that paedophilia is considered a mental illness and that could be stigmatising of mental health issues in general, you want to ignore all evidence so you can make what you believe fit an ideology that says lots of mental illness don't exist they are socially constructed.
    There is past precedent of mental illness being used for political purposes, for social control, and homosexuality as a mental illness is one of them, as well as (much longer ago) female hysteria.

    I don't think peadophilia is the same as these: The above had no good reason for imposing social control, but acting on peadophilia obviously does.


    What evidence is there that the attraction is a mental illness? (what is even the definition of 'mental illness' that that would fit under? 'Socially unwanted'?)

    Psychologists/neuroscientists actually have fúck all clue about the origins of peadophilia in the human mind, so it's entirely speculation and it's only a 'mental illness' because that's what's written in the DSM (which is pretty much the only reason homosexuality was ever a 'mental illness' as well).

    I think mental illnesses should not include issues that society deems 'unwanted/repugnant' - maybe they should still be treated as if they were mental illnesses, because they are societally undesired, but they should not be classed as mental illnesses, perhaps as 'social illness' or something else, that is actually more representative of what they are.


  • #66
    KyussBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭KyussBishop


    Grayson wrote: »
    Yes there is evidence. Of course you probably think it's possible for anyone with any mental illness or condition to just snap out of it of their own volition. Why don't you just walk around telling depressed people to cheer up. After all they have complete control over their actions. You could cut suicide down to zero.

    You could cure everyone of obsessive compulsive disorder. Simply by telling them they don't have to wash obsessively or count every step or what ever it is they have to do.

    You could probably even cure schizophrenia by telling them to just ignore the voices.

    There are many psychiatric and psychological conditions that result in people losing control. Sometimes people don't have control of their actions and sometimes this results in them doing horrible things. This is well known and obvious to anyone with a bit of common sense.

    Sometimes people do have control of their actions and sometimes they still do horrible things. Like when you were faced with evidence but still decided to keep the prejudices you love so much.
    Where is this evidence though? I don't see how it would function any different to another sexual attraction, and when a rapist attacks someone due to sexual attraction, they have not 'lost control', they are sociopaths.


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    clairefontaine
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,390 ✭✭✭clairefontaine


    KyussBishop wrote: »
    There is past precedent of mental illness being used for political purposes, for social control, and homosexuality as a mental illness is one of them, as well as (much longer ago) female hysteria.

    I don't think peadophilia is the same as these: The above had no good reason for imposing social control, but acting on peadophilia obviously does.


    What evidence is there that the attraction is a mental illness? (what is even the definition of 'mental illness' that that would fit under? 'Socially unwanted'?)

    Psychologists/neuroscientists actually have fúck all clue about the origins of peadophilia in the human mind, so it's entirely speculation and it's only a 'mental illness' because that's what's written in the DSM (which is pretty much the only reason homosexuality was ever a 'mental illness' as well).

    I think mental illnesses should not include issues that society deems 'unwanted/repugnant' - maybe they should still be treated as if they were mental illnesses, because they are societally undesired, but they should not be classed as mental illnesses, perhaps as 'social illness' or something else, that is actually more representative of what they are.

    And mental illness has let everyone off the moral hook. I beat my wife because I was depressed.

    My brain made me do it. Celebrate neuro diversity.

    It's not my fault I have no empathy. Baby I was born this way.


  • #68
    Princess Consuela Bananahammock
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,779 ✭✭✭✭Princess Consuela Bananahammock


    Lou.m wrote: »
    BDSM is consensual where the physical damage is done to the extent that it impairs the health of the practitioner to a great permanent extent then yes I would say that person has a compulsion and disordered thinking. If they are risking their lifelong health for a sexual urge there is an issue yes.

    Harm can still be caused with consentual activities - that is my point. Whether or not it's disordered thinking is a psychological question I don't beleive you're able to anwer.

    Whether or not it's a mental illness is a moral one.
    Lou.m wrote: »
    Many of them will report that they are in love with their targets and they are speaking of a child of 7. They do not understand their own minds a lot of the time. It's as if they cannot distinguish between different emotions or something. They cannot realize their own obsession. They have infantile mindsets or something.

    True, but could be said of a lot of conditions. Addictions, for example, where people remain in denial for too long.

    Everything I don't like is either woke or fascist - possibly both - pick one.



  • #69
    Grayson
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,442 ✭✭✭✭Grayson


    KyussBishop wrote: »
    Where is this evidence though? I don't see how it would function any different to another sexual attraction, and when a rapist attacks someone due to sexual attraction, they have not 'lost control', they are sociopaths.

    I said sometimes people have control of their actions and chose to do bad things. That is someone who sexually assaults someone without losing control. A good example would be when rape is used as a weapon of war. In those cases it is usually premeditated and performed by someone who is fully aware of their actions. Sometimes there is even a separation of the premeditation and the action, as a commander may decide what happens and a soldier carries out the action because they are "following orders". That would be similar to the situation you mentioned since no one lost control.

    On the other hand there are people who have no control of their actions. There are many extremely disturbed people who do not have control of what they are doing. I gave many examples in my previous post or can you disprove them? As for their relation with sexual assault Anti Social Personality disorder can manifest itself in this way. As can other conditions.

    Simply put compulsive behaviour in humans can be demonstrated to exist. I've given plenty of examples. If you want to demonstrate that compulsive behaviour does not and cannot ever exist, then please do so. I'd be interested to see how you disprove established theory.

    nozzferrahhtoo's post is probably the best explanation so far. The reasons for committing a crime like this are varied. Some people are born with an imbalance which causes them to be anti social. They are naturally violent and aggressive. This can lead to sexual assault. Some people become abusers because they were abused themselves. There is no innate biological reason why it happened. Studies have shown that most of the abusers of young boys are heterosexual males. The abuse has absolutely nothing to do with sex but rather has a deeper meaning. Your comparison to rape and sexual attraction has no relevance in that case (Incidentally, rape has very little to do with sexual attraction but more to do with power and oppression. which means that your original statement was wrong anyway)

    Trying to see something like this in the terms you put it in is overly simplistic.


  • #70
    syklops
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,966 ✭✭✭✭syklops


    Grayson wrote: »
    Do you understand the meaning of compulsion? They're not in control of their actions. They might even think they are until the compulsion takes over

    Father.


  • #71
    KyussBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭KyussBishop


    Grayson wrote: »
    I said sometimes people have control of their actions and chose to do bad things. That is someone who sexually assaults someone without losing control. A good example would be when rape is used as a weapon of war. In those cases it is usually premeditated and performed by someone who is fully aware of their actions. Sometimes there is even a separation of the premeditation and the action, as a commander may decide what happens and a soldier carries out the action because they are "following orders". That would be similar to the situation you mentioned since no one lost control.

    On the other hand there are people who have no control of their actions. There are many extremely disturbed people who do not have control of what they are doing. I gave many examples in my previous post or can you disprove them? As for their relation with sexual assault Anti Social Personality disorder can manifest itself in this way. As can other conditions.

    Simply put compulsive behaviour in humans can be demonstrated to exist. I've given plenty of examples. If you want to demonstrate that compulsive behaviour does not and cannot ever exist, then please do so. I'd be interested to see how you disprove established theory.

    nozzferrahhtoo's post is probably the best explanation so far. The reasons for committing a crime like this are varied. Some people are born with an imbalance which causes them to be anti social. They are naturally violent and aggressive. This can lead to sexual assault. Some people become abusers because they were abused themselves. There is no innate biological reason why it happened. Studies have shown that most of the abusers of young boys are heterosexual males. The abuse has absolutely nothing to do with sex but rather has a deeper meaning. Your comparison to rape and sexual attraction has no relevance in that case (Incidentally, rape has very little to do with sexual attraction but more to do with power and oppression. which means that your original statement was wrong anyway)

    Trying to see something like this in the terms you put it in is overly simplistic.
    You don't just lose control and go out and rape someone; and where it's premeditated, you don't lose control, spend a large amount of time building trust with someone and gaining access to them, and then trapping them into a situation where they are then assaulted.

    It takes conscious decision and control. That's nothing like depression, OCD or schizophrenia (as per your previous examples).

    Peadophilia is not compulsive behaviour; if it is caused by some actual physical imbalance, there needs to be proof of that, and there isn't any that distinguishes it in that respect, from other forms of attraction (it's just, rightly, viewed as disturbing by society, and abhorrent to act on).

    Some peadophiles probably do have a chemical imbalance, but for example, take the case recently of that previously straight guy, becoming gay after a stroke - that does not mean homosexuality is caused by physical problems/abonormalities, the same way as it doesn't for peadophilia. Just because it's true for some, does not mean it's true for all or even many.


    Separate peadophilia (the attraction), from acting on it (the sociopathic child abuse); they're different things, and one does not automatically imply the other.

    Also, that rape is about power is a myth that has been constructed by some of the more radical parts of the feminist movement; there's no proof behind it.


  • Advertisement
  • #72
    clairefontaine
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,390 ✭✭✭clairefontaine


    KyussBishop wrote: »
    You don't just lose control and go out and rape someone; and where it's premeditated, you don't lose control, spend a large amount of time building trust with someone and gaining access to them, and then trapping them into a situation where they are then assaulted.

    It takes conscious decision and control. That's nothing like depression, OCD or schizophrenia (as per your previous examples).

    Peadophilia is not compulsive behaviour; if it is caused by some actual physical imbalance, there needs to be proof of that, and there isn't any that distinguishes it in that respect, from other forms of attraction (it's just, rightly, viewed as disturbing by society, and abhorrent to act on).

    Some peadophiles probably do have a chemical imbalance, but for example, take the case recently of that previously straight guy, becoming gay after a stroke - that does not mean homosexuality is caused by physical problems/abonormalities, the same way as it doesn't for peadophilia. Just because it's true for some, does not mean it's true for all or even many.


    Separate peadophilia (the attraction), from acting on it (the sociopathic child abuse); they're different things, and one does not automatically imply the other.

    Also, that rape is about power is a myth that has been constructed by some of the more radical parts of the feminist movement; there's no proof behind it.

    Also plenty of child molestation is situational, as in opportunistic adults who take advantage of an opportunity, they will just go for whomever happens to be there.

    Fixed notions of heterosexuality or homosexuality or pedophilia will just confound things.


  • #73
    KyussBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭KyussBishop


    clairefontaine wrote: »
    Also plenty of child molestation is situational, as in opportunistic adults who take advantage of an opportunity, they will just go for whomever happens to be there.

    Fixed notions of heterosexuality or homosexuality or pedophilia will just confound things.
    Ya true - it's far more a problem of just straight-out sociopathy, enabling the person to act on it in the first place.


  • #74
    clairefontaine
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,390 ✭✭✭clairefontaine


    KyussBishop wrote: »
    Ya true - it's far more a problem of just straight-out sociopathy, enabling the person to act on it in the first place.

    And then there are siblings too.

    Or in cultures where there are strong prohibitions on sex then sometimes the adults or the adolescents target the kids.

    Its very complicated, talking about an attraction to children only covers a small percentage of child molestations.


  • #75
    KyussBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭KyussBishop


    clairefontaine wrote: »
    And then there are siblings too.

    Or in cultures where there are strong prohibitions on sex then sometimes the adults or the adolescents target the kids.

    Its very complicated, talking about an attraction to children only covers a small percentage of child molestations.
    That's true, yes; there's a lot more to it than just the attraction.


  • #76
    Grayson
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,442 ✭✭✭✭Grayson


    KyussBishop wrote: »
    Where is this evidence though? I don't see how it would function any different to another sexual attraction, and when a rapist attacks someone due to sexual attraction, they have not 'lost control', they are sociopaths.

    You didn't actually read my post did you? tell you want. Why don't you present one single shred of evidence to show that all sexual predators are just following a sexual urge but have no self control. According to your opinion a rapist and you are exactly the same except you manage to keep it in your pants. They have exactly the same sexual desires as you and are turned on by exactly the same stuff.


  • #77
    KyussBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭KyussBishop


    Grayson wrote: »
    You didn't actually read my post did you? tell you want. Why don't you present one single shred of evidence to show that all sexual predators are just following a sexual urge but have no self control. According to your opinion a rapist and you are exactly the same except you manage to keep it in your pants. They have exactly the same sexual desires as you and are turned on by exactly the same stuff.
    What I've posted is the exact opposite. That a rapist (who is or is not a peadophile) has a different problem, more in line with sociopathy, and that peadophilia is a separate issue of attraction, that is not automatically accompanied by sociopathy or compulsion to abuse.

    The sociopathic peadophiles are the sexual predators, and there are those who are not sociopathic and not at risk of acting on their attraction, who are not.


Advertisement
Advertisement