The Paedophile Next Door

Into The Blue · 26-11-2014 03:29PM

Being attracted to kids is enough to warrant removal from society.

Buona Fortuna · 26-11-2014 03:45PM

Into The Blue wrote: »

Being attracted to kids is enough to warrant removal from society.

I think you mean being sexually attracted to ...?

But where to Madagascar?

nozzferrahhtoo · 26-11-2014 03:46PM

Into The Blue wrote: »

Being attracted to kids is enough to warrant removal from society.

Why is that then? I have never felt comfortable with thought crime myself. I prefer to condemn people for crimes they actually commit. Not crimes they are tempted to commit. I wonder how many of us would be innocent under your regime.

nadey · 26-11-2014 03:48PM

Bunch of pedos itt.......j/k

CdeC · 26-11-2014 04:29PM

I think this is why we need to have a discussion on it. It's not so black and white. People seem to scream "HANG THEM ALL" without giving it any thought.

I believe that we should have a more understanding attitude to would be paedophiles. I do not believe that someone who feels they are sexually attracted to children as an adult but never acted on it is the same as someone who has travelled to places and actually had sex with children or has actively seeked to do so.
If we had a system where someone like this guy Eddie can come forward, speak that he has a problem and has these urges and then help him with whatever he needs to prevent him on ever acting on them. I feel that a country has a duty of care to all its citizens. This would then segregate the less likely to offend paedophiles from the more dangerous sort that then can be actively tracked. These guys do not want to be found so it would be better that all of the resources from police go into tracking these guys down and prosecuting them for their crimes and get them on a register that can be monitored.

Also, these guys do not probably understand why they are sexually attracted to children. Its easy to forget but they were children once and perhaps they suffered abuse or neglect. By these guys having the ability to come forward will give a chance for study to understand why people become paedophiles and why their sexuality does not progress normally like most people in society.

I do not believe in lesser punishments for paedophiles, just a stratification so that actual offenders can be segregated and monitored.

Grayson · 26-11-2014 04:34PM

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Why is that then? I have never felt comfortable with thought crime myself. I prefer to condemn people for crimes they actually commit. Not crimes they are tempted to commit. I wonder how many of us would be innocent under your regime.

Besides the fact that not all paedophiles/abusers are the same.
Some have a sexual attraction. many don't. For example there are a large number of people who abuse young boys who would describe themselves as hetrosexual males. that abuse has nothing to do with sexual attraction.

there's also a large number of abusers who were abused when they were younger.

For both of those groups, attraction is actually not an issue.

Then there's people like the person mentioned in the OP.

there's a huge range of people who would be classified as paedophiles and there needs to be investigation into their conditions to determine if there's anything that can be done to detect/treat them.

The Corinthian · 26-11-2014 04:37PM

sadie06 wrote: »

You can't just file it as another orientation in my opinion.

How did you think the DSM worked?

ScumLord wrote: »

I don't think the age of consent should be lowered. If it was you could have 40 year olds preying on 13 year olds.

But 60 year olds preying on 17 year olds is grand? You can argue that those four years involve a lot of maturing, but the rate at which people mature varies hugely and many out there should probably not have the right to consent to sex well into their twenties.

TBH, the greatest deterrent against sex with someone too young for the vast majority is that until they reach 25, they are just to annoying to stomach.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 26-11-2014 04:39PM

Frist and foremost, you need a more accepting and understanding society. Who the **** is going to come forward and say "I'm a pedophile and I need help" when society thinks the bets course of action to lynch and hang you?

This idea of it being a mental illness is a fallacy too. The aincent Greeks were advocates of pedophilia and are regualrlay regarded as the first democratci society.

Grayson · 26-11-2014 04:43PM

The Corinthian wrote: »

How did you think the DSM worked?

But 60 year olds preying on 17 year olds is grand? You can argue that those four years involve a lot of maturing, but the rate at which people mature varies hugely and many out there should probably not have the right to consent to sex well into their twenties.

TBH, the greatest deterrent against sex with someone too young for the vast majority is that until they reach 25, they are just to annoying to stomach.

That whole age gap thing seems to work well in other countries. It doesn't criminalise a 17 year old that sleeps with a 16 year old. In a case like that the age difference could be a couple of months yet the 17 year old is committing a crime.

many countries say that it's ok to sleep with a minor so long as your age is within a certain distance of their age. So it's ok for a 17 year old to sleep with a 16 year old, but wrong for say a 20 year old to do so.

looking_around · 26-11-2014 04:50PM

CdeC wrote: »

I think this is why we need to have a discussion on it. It's not so black and white. People seem to scream "HANG THEM ALL" without giving it any thought.

I believe that we should have a more understanding attitude to would be paedophiles. I do not believe that someone who feels they are sexually attracted to children as an adult but never acted on it is the same as someone who has travelled to places and actually had sex with children or has actively seeked to do so.
If we had a system where someone like this guy Eddie can come forward, speak that he has a problem and has these urges and then help him with whatever he needs to prevent him on ever acting on them. I feel that a country has a duty of care to all its citizens. This would then segregate the less likely to offend paedophiles from the more dangerous sort that then can be actively tracked. These guys do not want to be found so it would be better that all of the resources from police go into tracking these guys down and prosecuting them for their crimes and get them on a register that can be monitored.

Also, these guys do not probably understand why they are sexually attracted to children. Its easy to forget but they were children once and perhaps they suffered abuse or neglect. By these guys having the ability to come forward will give a chance for study to understand why people become paedophiles and why their sexuality does not progress normally like most people in society.

I do not believe in lesser punishments for paedophiles, just a stratification so that actual offenders can be segregated and monitored.

would be easier if you used correct clarification. paedophilia isn't a crime, child abuse is. a person can be a paedophile without ever touching a child. they aren't "potential paedophiles".

The Corinthian · 26-11-2014 04:57PM

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

This idea of it being a mental illness is a fallacy too. The aincent Greeks were advocates of pedophilia and are regualrlay regarded as the first democratci society.

Well, that's not really true. What they sometimes practiced was homosexual pederasty, which is post-pubescent and had fairly misogynistic roots. It was also not universally accepted amongst all Greeks (some city states more than others) and had it's detractors, including Plato, if I remember correctly.

Grayson wrote: »

That whole age gap thing seems to work well in other countries. It doesn't criminalise a 17 year old that sleeps with a 16 year old. In a case like that the age difference could be a couple of months yet the 17 year old is committing a crime.

Well let's not start pretending that Irish law on this topic is anything other than retarded; if a 13-year old boy has sex with his 14-year old girlfriend he can go to jail, while she cannot be prosecuted [1]. Or that oral sex is legal at fifteen as only penetrative sex is illegal before 17.

[1] I remember a thread somewhere on Boards, some time ago where a guy was being blackmailed with prosecution by the mother of their child, because she'd fallen pregnant at something like fifteen, despite the fact they were the same age.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 26-11-2014 05:03PM

The Corinthian wrote: »

Well, that's not really true. What they sometimes practiced was homosexual pederasty, which is post-pubescent and had fairly misogynistic roots. It was also not universally accepted amongst all Greeks (some city states more than others) and had it's detractors, including Plato, if I remember correctly.

Fair point, but what was practiced and (in the states that adovcated it) would certainly be classed as pedophilia and result in child abuse cases today.

My point though, is: in order for it to be a mental illness, if needs a medical diagnosis, not a societal one.

jimgoose · 26-11-2014 05:10PM

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

...My point though, is: in order for it to be a mental illness, if needs a medical diagnosis, not a societal one.

Perchance it should be regarded as more of a personality disorder than a mental illness per sé, and hence diagnosed by something like the Hare Test for psychopathy/APD?

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 26-11-2014 05:24PM

jimgoose wrote: »

Perchance it should be regarded as more of a personality disorder than a mental illness per sé, and hence diagnosed by something like the Hare Test for psychopathy/APD?

Not knowing much about the test, but that would just seem to indicate whether someone is or is not likely to have the perceived personality of a pedophile. It doesn't do anything to define the term or resolve the problem.

It's also said that a mental disorder can be simply discribed as being in the minority of one.

jimgoose · 26-11-2014 05:28PM

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Not knowing much about the test, but that would just seem to indicate whether someone is or is not likely to have the perceived personality of a pedophile. It doesn't do anything to define the term or resolve the problem.

It's also said that a mental disorder can be simply discribed as being in the minority of one.

Defining the term doesn't resolve the problem either. Some disorders, psychopathy being one, can't really be defined accurately outside of a set of symptoms. I just personally think it would be useful to have some sort of system in place where people can become aware of the condition and seek help before they hurt someone. It would be no harm if violent psychopaths did the same.

Piliger · 26-11-2014 05:37PM

Into The Blue wrote: »

Being attracted to kids is enough to warrant removal from society.

So bring in the thought police ? Really ?

The Corinthian · 26-11-2014 05:42PM

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Fair point, but what was practiced and (in the states that adovcated it) would certainly be classed as pedophilia and result in child abuse cases today.

Only by illiterates. Problem is that such is the hysteria surrounding this topic that there seems to be little understanding of even basic definitions. So the Greeks would have practiced sexual relations with post-pubescent boy, which cannot be pedophilia by definition, but may be popularly regarded as such by the uneducated, hysterical masses. You may not think this a big deal, but such ignorance can lead to very negative consequences too.

Actually, I'm surprised no one has brought this guy into the discussion:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ts-NTTeEoA0

My point though, is: in order for it to be a mental illness, if needs a medical diagnosis, not a societal one.

Doesn't work like that in the World of psychology and psychiatry though. The whole field is social science that seems rife with political and social influences rather than scientific ones determining diagnosis. Look at how the diagnosis of homosexuality has changed over the decades; from mental illness, to paraphilia to orientation. It was ultimately societal changes (and lobbying) that brought this about.

MadDog76 · 26-11-2014 05:49PM

floggg wrote: »

Trust me, the greater public good isn't being served by punishing (never mind executing as you appear to suggest) somebody who hasn't committed and doesnt intend to commit any crime whatsoever.

Let me ask you a genuine question ........... if you had children (maybe you do already) and you knew someone who confesses to being a paedophile (or has urges/fantasies) but has never acted on those urges and absolutely swears they never will, would you let that individual babysit your children?
I'm not talking about a stranger here either, I mean somebody close to you ......... perhaps a brother or close family friend .......... would you be confident enough in their abilities to control themselves to allow them to babysit for you??

ceadaoin. · 26-11-2014 05:53PM

I think that a significant number of paedophiles aren't simply 'attracted' to children. They are attracted to the power and control that comes with abusing a young victim. Putting themselves in a position to have access to children, grooming, threatening and often using violence. Those aren't the actions of a normal empathetic person who simply has an unwanted sexual orientation. They are the actions of a psychopath. I don't think these type of people are likely to come forward for help and if they do it will be only after they are caught and acting remorseful.

For others that don't want to abuse anyone then there should be some form of help available. I just don't know if it will make much difference to the abuse stats though.

Holsten · 26-11-2014 05:56PM

MadDog76 wrote: »

Let me ask you a genuine question ........... if you had children (maybe you do already) and you knew someone who confesses to being a paedophile (or has urges/fantasies) but has never acted on those urges and absolutely swears they never will, would you let that individual babysit your children?
I'm not talking about a stranger here either, I mean somebody close to you ......... perhaps a brother or close family friend .......... would you be confident enough in their abilities to control themselves to allow them to babysit for you??

Is there any evidence that suggests these people have some uncontrollable urges? I don't think so.

If I'm in a room with a bunch of women I'm not going to rape them as I'm not a rapist. I would assume the same can be said for these folk unless there is evidence to suggest otherwise.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 26-11-2014 05:58PM

jimgoose wrote: »

Defining the term doesn't resolve the problem either. Some disorders, psychopathy being one, can't really be defined accurately outside of a set of symptoms. I just personally think it would be useful to have some sort of system in place where people can become aware of the condition and seek help before they hurt someone. It would be no harm if violent psychopaths did the same.

I think most pedophiles are aware of it.

But mis-defining it as a mental illness when it isn't is definitely going to be counter-productive.

Piliger · 26-11-2014 06:01PM

Holsten wrote: »

Is there any evidence that suggests these people have some uncontrollable urges? I don't think so.

If I'm in a room with a bunch of women I'm not going to rape them as I'm not a rapist. I would assume the same can be said for these folk unless there is evidence to suggest otherwise.

The suggestion by some appalling people is that we should jail, people for what they 'might' do ... where does that lead to ? Why stop at paedophiles ? What about jailing people who dream of killing people they don't like ? of stealing money from a bank ? or breaking into the big house and stealing their jewellery ? or punching Gerry Adams in the nose ? Do we jail all of those people too ?

MadDog76 · 26-11-2014 06:01PM

Holsten wrote: »

Is there any evidence that suggests these people have some uncontrollable urges? I don't think so.

If I'm in a room with a bunch of women I'm not going to rape them as I'm not a rapist. I would assume the same can be said for these folk unless there is evidence to suggest otherwise.

So you definitely would have no hesitation in allowing him/her to babysit one of your children???

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 26-11-2014 06:03PM

The Corinthian wrote: »

Only by illiterates. Problem is that such is the hysteria surrounding this topic that there seems to be little understanding of even basic definitions. So the Greeks would have practiced sexual relations with post-pubescent boy, which cannot be pedophilia by definition, but may be popularly regarded as such by the uneducated, hysterical masses. You may not think this a big deal, but such ignorance can lead to very negative consequences too.

Actually, I'm surprised no one has brought this guy into the discussion:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ts-NTTeEoA0

Doesn't work like that in the World of psychology and psychiatry though. The whole field is social science that seems rife with political and social influences rather than scientific ones determining diagnosis. Look at how the diagnosis of homosexuality has changed over the decades; from mental illness, to paraphilia to orientation. It was ultimately societal changes (and lobbying) that brought this about.

Again, I'm not saying it was a psoitive factor of the society.

I;d also argue that, in the case you mention above, it was society that labeled homosexuality a mental illness in the first place; and that more understanding and research led to it being caterogised more corerctly.

ceadaoin. · 26-11-2014 06:14PM

Holsten wrote: »

Is there any evidence that suggests these people have some uncontrollable urges? I don't think so.

If I'm in a room with a bunch of women I'm not going to rape them as I'm not a rapist. I would assume the same can be said for these folk unless there is evidence to suggest otherwise.

According to the program, 1 in 6 kids in the UK are abused. Is that not evidence that they have trouble controlling their urges?

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 26-11-2014 06:23PM

ceadaoin. wrote: »

According to the program, 1 in 6 kids in the UK are abused. Is that not evidence that they have trouble controlling their urges?

Well, this depends on what percentage of the population is abusng and not abusing.

What study are we talking about?

Galwayguy35 · 26-11-2014 06:30PM

Not easy to listen to someone say they are attracted to 4 and 5 year olds, that guy was very stupid to come on TV and say things like that.

He is leaving himself open to losing friends and family and could well be the victim of a physical assault now that people know who he is.

ScumLord · 26-11-2014 06:31PM

ceadaoin. wrote: »

According to the program, 1 in 6 kids in the UK are abused. Is that not evidence that they have trouble controlling their urges?

Does it say 1 in 6 kids are abused by adults? I would think it's as likely that a fair percentage of those abused are abused by other kids around the same age.

floggg · 26-11-2014 07:02PM

MadDog76 wrote: »

Let me ask you a genuine question ........... if you had children (maybe you do already) and you knew someone who confesses to being a paedophile (or has urges/fantasies) but has never acted on those urges and absolutely swears they never will, would you let that individual babysit your children?
I'm not talking about a stranger here either, I mean somebody close to you ......... perhaps a brother or close family friend .......... would you be confident enough in their abilities to control themselves to allow them to babysit for you??

Seriously? What has that hypothetical got to do with not locking somebody up unless they actually commit a crime?

Bit of a non-sense red herring argument/Extraordinary leap in logic.

It's also one which can't be answered in a vacuum.

You also seem to be assuming that all people with an attraction to child are rapists. Many aren't I would imagine - in the same way just because other men are attracted to adult women they won't go out and rape them the first opportunity you got.

Ultimately the risk will depend on the persons involved. But in the same way you would probably trust your best friend not to rape your wife or 18 year old daughter if left alone with them, in sure there are pedophiles (are whatever other term is most appropriate) who can be trusted to exercise self control.

Holsten · 26-11-2014 07:05PM

ceadaoin. wrote: »

According to the program, 1 in 6 kids in the UK are abused. Is that not evidence that they have trouble controlling their urges?

How many are abused by people with a sexual interest in pre pubescent children though?

How many are abused by children themselves?

Is that all forms of abuse or just sexual?

Not everyone who abuses a child is a pedophile.

The Paedophile Next Door

Comments