The Paedophile Next Door

obplayer wrote: »

Does this mean that without it being offered by someone able, both legally and morally, that you would resort to rape?

CdeC wrote: »

Can we stop comparing paedophilia to homosexuality. They are not related.
Paedophilia is not a sexual orientation. It is a sexual preference.





I agree 100% with the first statement but not the second. Your sexual orientation is ingrained yes but how you grow shapes that orientation. People are not born abusers they have had a series of experiences at a certain important developmental stage in their lives that has somehow caused them to be attracted to kids. I don't like paedophilia being compared to homosexuality at all. Changing someones sexual orientation has not proved successful but we must try to treat someone who is an abuser or has committed crimes as these are learned rather than natural.

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

As would I so thankfully that is not _Quite_ what I am saying. I would not be ok with just any pedophile around my children. What I AM saying is that there are a select few people in my life who I trust for a number of reasons and those reason outweigh pedophilia, were they to admit to me they have such feelings. Though thus far no one has made such an admission in my current circle of friends.

Since this, rather than my points, appears to be an issue for some people let me expand on it somewhat. And I will do so at first without reference to the emotive topic of pedophilia.

I have one friend who is, to say the least, a horn. He is sex and woman obsessed. He LOVES sex. Inordinately. He talks about it a lot, he has his porn collection, he is ooogling women on nights out, and he chats them up all the time hoping for some sex.

However there have been occasions where he has had sure thing sex laid before him, with women well "up his street" and he has turned it down. The reasons for this vary. On one occasion he deemed the girl too drunk to consent meaningfully even though she protested she was. Another girl admitted, as they were back in her apartment and well into proceedings, that she had a boyfriend, so he backed off. In another case he was offered sex with a very attractive woman by her boyfriend. Swingers of a sort, though the BF himself was not to be present. But he did not consent to that either.

So this is the kind of guy I would trust implicitly in sexual situations. Despite being the biggest horn there is known to man or beast, his integrity, morals and ethic outweighs this by far. The kind of guy who despite his horniness if for some reason I had to leave SOMEONE alone with my scantily clad, out of her head drunk partner (partner is not a drinker, this is hypothetical) for a few hours it would be him I would choose with NO fear of ANY sort that he would consider anything..... ungentlemanly.

All I am saying essentially when I make the comments I did, is that there are people in my life, like him, a small number of them, who if I found out they had sexual attraction towards children.... that I would trust everything ELSE about them as a person as a whole... their morality, integrity, ethic, self discipline and control and love for my children.... to know that my trust for _them_ with my children would not be shaken by this revelation.

But that is NOT me saying, as you sort of implied above, that I am perfectly happy to leave my children alone with pedophiles in general. I would not say that, and have not said that. But for me pedophilia is irrelevant in this because pedophilia or not, there are few people I trust leaving my children alone with ANYWAY.



I do not assume it to be a compulsion or an addiction in general. Sure there are some people with that. But there are rapists of adults too that have it. Having an attraction.... and having such compulsions and addictions.... are not synonymous. They are different things.

And merely having an attraction to children does not mean you are a risk, a compulsion or an addict. As I said in a previous post there used to be an "asses against the wall lads" reaction to homosexuals. As if by simply having same sex attraction you are automatically a full on deviant, and if we take the risk of turning your back on them, youll be bent over with your pants down before you know it.

I think we have evolved and matured enough as a society to understand why that is ridiculous. Homosexuality is not any more seen with an automatic compulsion to shag any and all males that you get the chance to, regardless of consent. And I do not think pedophilia should be viewed as that either, automatically or out of hand.

And that distinction can be explored and assimilated into our thinking on the subject without EVER losing sight of the goals and concerns that you and I both likely have in entirely equal measure.



But is it though? I hope what I said above makes you question this but I repeat it here for force. The attraction is not automatically analogous to addiction or compulsion. At all. It is our horror and lack of true understanding of the subject that leads many to conflate them, but they are not to be conflated.

Just like for every man in our society who rapes a woman, there are innumerable others who are attracted to women and conduct themselves perfectly well. For every man who would find a passed out drunk girl at a part in a short skirt and unguarded.... who would send his hands uninvited up that skirts.... there are 1000s of others who would roll her properly into the bed, cover her up with the blanket, and stand outside the door until such time as he can identify someone who can take her home or take guardianship of her.

For every person who abuses or rapes children, there is quite likely to be NUMEROUS others who have the attraction who do not act on it. More than we imagine is my suspicion and we would likely be shocked were we to have true figures on it.

So really my only point on this thread, distilled down into a sound-bite, is that attraction is distinct from action, and desire is distinct from intent.

And if we do want to foster a society where pedophiles come forward and seek assistance dealing with or even merely understanding their feelings..... we will not get there by implementing the kinds of responses that have been suggested on this thread. Which have ranged from several curtailing methods of their freedoms and liberties.... to the more extreme poster who said he would remove them entirely from society upon identification.

My concerns there, which have not really been addressed, are two fold. A) Such a thing would stop them coming forward anyway so it would be pointless and The kinds of people we wish to target BY implementing such nonsense are not likely to be the ones who came forward in the first place.

looking_around wrote: »

Why not?
Because you think all pedophiles are dangerous and don't know right from wrong?

looking_around wrote: »

That's like asking
"are you comfortable with your best friend masturbating about your sister?"..

Most people wouldn't be...but that doesn't mean your friend is wrong.

How many guys, think of an attractive girl they work with and masturbate?

Also your post assumes pedophiles are attracted to every child. No person is attracted to every other person.

Anyway, this is bordering is "cartoon Porn/fantasies" wrong....no, they're not and should never be.

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

But this is no more accurate than saying all heterosexual males are potential rapists or anyone with fists has the potential assault or murder. Or anyone with a brain is a potential con artist. Or anyone with a mouth and a car is a potential drink driver.

Merely having an attraction does not mean you will be compelled to ignore and over rule the consent and safety of the object of your desire. Your "potential" says nothing in that it says too much. We are all "potential" something. The point you seem to be trying to make, but are not carrying in any form, is that somehow paedophiles are some how more of a potential abuser than anyone else is a potential anything else. You are really exhibiting nothing more than that "asses against the wall" mentality I discussed in two earlier posts.



I imagine so because, as I said above, you are attaching an inordinate and unwarranted amount of "potential" to this one thing over any other. For reasons you not only have not laid out, but have not even begun to try.



Except you can. And the only reason you have offered to suggest we can not, is your say so.



What an awful view point that I can do nothing but be grateful I do not share. Unless someone is potentially harmful or damaging to us, they do not require or deserve our help?

Do you not think their own well being is reason enough, or has your hatred of paedophiles precluded you from the least piece of human decency and empathy? Do you not think their own disgust at their own feelings...... and the misery, self loathing and alienation this brings them.......as exhibited for example by the self confessed Paedophile in the documentary that started the thread..... is not reason enough for them to deserve and require our help?

No, you would just have them rot in their misery unless they were a potential harm and therefore warrant us deigning to notice them? Is that what we are now? What Hamlet said with irony I could say with disgust. What a piece of work is man.



It is not just ok, it is entirely irrelevant. We do not convict or judge people for thought crime. Many of us do things in our imagination that we would never enact or do in real life. If someone is masturbating to thoughts of children, your mother.... or entertaining fantasies of killing their annoying boss slowly and painfully...... so what? Most people entertaining those thoughts have absolutely no actual inclination to implement ANY of it. What care you what goes on in peoples heads?

What goes on in our mind is irrelevant and no ones business. If someone is right this second masturbating to the thought of raping either me or my partner.... so the hell what? What do I care? Its their imagination. Its their mind. I could not give a crap. Do you sit around obsessing about such things?

Piliger wrote: »

What has that to do with the issue ?

Piliger wrote: »

Yes you've said it more than once. The comical thing about that is that the chance of a person with those kinds of feelings ever saying it to you, or anyone else, is a zillion to one. Also not being able to relate to someone who you disagree with isn't really all that interesting.

Piliger wrote: »

I fail to grasp how an 'organisation's' policies would shed light on that ... no offence or attack intended. Organisations have legal commitments and risks and always take the extreme risk free option where possible. Not necessarily an instructive guide to how people should live their lives.