Pedophile Piggy

[Torsten]

I've known Stoney for many years and to anyone who has known him for that long it would appear that ridiculing his intellect in the way as has been done in this thread can only reflect badly on the author rather than stoney.

I don't agree with Stoney and I think he misses a major point, but then again I feel the rest are also missing his point.

It's a complex issue, but rather than dealing with it by degrees it seems there is one group who would like to simply throw everything into one basket. This is highly reminiscent of the drug war where heroin and pot were long treated to be the same offence and where such lumping has caused more problems [both perceived and real] as a direct result of such short sightedness and assumed moral highground. I don't agree with stoney, but at least he sees that the current policy isn't working and that changes are needed.

One major aspect that has not been addressed is the effect that incarceration has on pedophiles. It does nothing to stop their urges, but it does a lot to fuck up the rest of their lives. When a pedo gets released and has nothing left in his life other than his sickness then he has become more of a danger to society than before. It's just like locking up a shoplifter or pot smoker in a prison where he meets drug dealers, violent criminals, and other more severe criminals and when he gets released he is a fully skilled and conscience free robber who is much more of a threat to society than when he went in. We all agree that a shoplifter needs to be dealt with, but we must also come to understand that our penal system creates more criminals than it rehabilitates.

And before anyone thinks I am soft on pedos, let me say that personally I feel that any repeat offender who violates children before puberty should be castrated. We know there is no cure, so if we can't fix them with the first pass through the legal system then I reckon we should fix them for good. People can have a productive life and can even have some sperm stored so they can procreate. These peopel fuck up young lives in the most horrid ways and often produce more pedophiles in the process, so I have no problem with some of their rights being curtailed after the first warning. And castration might indeed be an effective deterrent. [btw, I feel the same way about repeat rapists]. Things are not as clear cut for 'kids' that are sexually active and I have no answer for those situations - and neither does the legal system it seems.

This is a serious topic and I think it is a pity that it had to degenerate in such a way. I know stoney is mature, and I figure tobydoo is mature [ie mature enough to have a 13 y.o. child] and this sort of conduct is not becoming for either of you. As for Vert, he just likes to stoke the fire, so I won't comment on his maturity

Act your age folks.

[XipeTotec]

I've known Stoney for many years and to anyone who has known him for that long it would appear that ridiculing his intellect in the way as has been done in this thread can only reflect badly on the author rather than stoney.

people have only responded to the intellect that has been presented to them. Stone may well be an intelligent fellow, but he has failed make that obvious within this thread.

I don't agree with Stoney and I think he misses a major point, but then again I feel the rest are also missing his point.

I understand his point, but it was expressed very poorly, and blurred with bizarre rants

One major aspect that has not been addressed is the effect that incarceration has on pedophiles. It does nothing to stop their urges, but it does a lot to fuck up the rest of their lives.

I hear that getting fucked when you are 8 by a 30 yo occasionally fucks up the rest of your life.

Things are not as clear cut for 'kids' that are sexually active and I have no answer for those situations - and neither does the legal system as it keep changing.

I believe its not paedophilia if a 10 yo old is sexually active with a 10 year old. It is an issue though, if a 10 yo is sexually active with a 30 yo. I think the law recognises this difference to some extent (not sure about 10, but I think it is no offence to have sex with a 15 year old if the number of years between ages is

minimal, 1 or 2 years, I can't remember)

That said... i don't really have anything more to say about this, and infact, should not have really got involved in the 1st place, because, as we all know, it is not really like me to discuss things seriously in here. I just thought I would respond to torstens spiel, as... we cant let him have the last word

Edited March 25, 2008 by XipeTotec

[Sparkster]

argh...

I hate this topic, its heart wretching...

Everytime this discussion crops up anywhere, there seems to be a blur between "Child Molestor/Pedophile/Rapist/Downloader of Underage porn"

They all get tarred by the same brush, and people who want to convey how morally righteous they are, seem to want to crush every one of their bones to dust, just to proove to the world just how righteous they are compared to those monsters.

It all backfires though, when their is such a moral hysteria and a blur of definitions in comparison to public understanding that good people, decent people get hurt.

My father was a school teacher for over 20 years, and lost his job when 2 girls made up absolute garbage about him.

We had our house searched by the police, he was taken to court, although he was found 'not guilty' pretty quickly, he lost his job anyway. The school knew he didn't do it, but they refused to let him back because they knew shit sticks, and they knew of the hysteria it could cause the public. "an accused pedophile working with children!!!"

His court cases cost the New Zealand tax payers over $120,000. (and you might want to ask yourself why there are no male teachers, especially in early education)

The pain it caused my family was excrutiating, because my dad lost his job we had to sell our house, we ended up moving cities because we got sick of the memories. (the court cases had dragged on for years)

During this was happening, some crazy shit was happening in the UK, local newspapers started to publish the names of "sex offenders" and their addresses, this was for 'public safety' and to 'protect the kids' they said. What was happening was that vigilantes were attacking these people and setting fire to their houses, many of these people who had their names and addresses listed committed suicide. The most heartbreaking thing is that some of them were innocent, and didn't have the legal representation afforded to them if they were a school teacher.

The stigma is so unbearable for some people who have been caught that they do commit suicide, they do this because they don't think their lives are salvagable, and they know how the public reacts, with brutality...

Its sad that people are willing to do horrific things to eachother to prevent horrible things being done.

Judges are well aware of the social consequences of these offenders, and they are handing down sentances taking into account the punishment they incur the rest of their lives from the stigma attached.

[Torsten]

I hear that getting fucked when you are 8 by a 30 yo occasionally fucks up the rest of your life.

I already said that, so obviously I am not ignorant of that fact. I doubt that you really missed my intended point but I guess you decided to go along with the general flow of this topic which seems to be to try and misinterpret every poster as much as possible.

obviously my point was that if you have a convicted pedo and take away everything else in his life then he is likely to focus more on his obsession - if for nothing else than boredom or loneliness. This makes them even more predatorial. But that's all fine and dandy cos the system works eh? As long as the moral majority sees them paraded off to prison they know they have done the right thing. This shortsightedtness is astounding.

So what did you just contribute Xipe? You took a very clear paragraph and selectively picked something you could misinterpret if posted by itself. Brilliant!

My paragraph was not about protecting pedophiles. It was about the long term prospect of rehabilitating them [ie the lack thereof] and the increased risk they pose to society after their incarceration. or did you not read that far?

The kids that get violated by these animals are often seriously fucked up as a result , so just how did your comment help?

[XipeTotec]

thats a sad story sparkster. It is a whole other issue though, which nowdays, as opposed to 20 years ago has reached a level of hysteria relating to men working in a profession where they are in close contact with children. An old friend once told me that when she was studying to be a child care worker, they had a type of work experience, where people bought there kids into the campus, to be minded for the day. She said that one of the mothers came in, and asked with disgust, why a male was doing child care, as if to suggest that he had sinister motives. Another friend of mine worked for a while at a school as a teachers aid. I was disturbed by the fear which was prevalent within the school system, and is prevalent within our society as a whole. At this particular school, and I have been led to believe that it is common across the board, teachers were not allowed to touch students. This includes picking them up if they fall over, touching them when they approach you to hug (as kids do.) etc. It is almost at the point where any man hanging around with a child is suspect of paedophilia. As for a homosexual man hanging around with a child.... well, if they fuck men, then they must fuck boys... please don't take that remark the wrong way, it's just an illustration of the common social attitude. That said, it is really a separate issue from the one discussed previously in this thread.

[XipeTotec]

I already said that, so obviously I am not ignorant of that fact. I doubt that you really missed my intended point

obviously my point was that if you have a convicted pedo and take away everything else in his life then he is likely to focus more on his obsession - if for nothing else than boredom or loneliness. This makes them even more predatorial. But that's all fine and dandy cos the system works eh? As long as the moral majority sees them paraded off to prison they know they have done the right thing. This shortsightedtness is astounding.

So what did you just contribute Xipe? You took a very clear paragraph and selectively picked something you could misinterpret if posted by itself. Brilliant!

My paragraph was not about protecting pedophiles. It was about the long term prospect of rehabilitating them [ie the lack thereof] and the increased risk they pose to society after their incarceration. or did you not read that far?

The kids that get violated by these animals are often seriously fucked up as a result , so just how did your comment help?

maybe my point is that I don't care if a paedophiles life is fucked for the rest of their lives. I think they deserve it for preying on the most vulnerable members of society in such a way.

but I guess you decided to go along with the general flow of this topic which seems to be to try and misinterpret every poster as much as possible.

but then, the opposite side of the debate in this thread, seems only to want to go against the general flow, as if there is some sort of valor in not agreeing with the mainstream. Some of us are being labelled as "the moral majority", and "the hardliners" (a great way to try to create some sort of shame relating to our stance), for having a belief that molesting 8 year olds is wrong ( which I'm sure everyone here also believes, so why the debate?). None of us have said that there is not other issues such as age of consent, etc. But we do believe that it is a black and white issue in regards to molesting 8 year olds. As much as our society is flawed.... the sheep can't always be wrong.

Edited March 25, 2008 by XipeTotec

[Sparkster]

this includes picking them up if they fall over, touching them when they approach you to hug (as kids do.)

Funny you mentioned that, there was a handicap girl that used to come up to my father for hugs, the police prosecutor tried to use it against him because he never "prevented her from touching him"

thats a sad story sparkster. It is a whole other issue though, which nowdays, as opposed to 20 years ago has reached a level of hysteria relating to men working in a profession where they are in close contact with children.

I know that the perpertrators are a different kettle of fish to those who are simply wrongfully acussed, but its an eye openner to how fucked up and hyterical public opinion can be.

Because public opinion is more passionate than rational, people perceive judges arn't doing their job unless theres a public hanging, when all they're trying to do really is make rational rather than passionate decisions based on all the facts. The truth is the media isn't privy to alot of the facts about court cases, but will make headlines of cases they perceive to be worthy of getting riled about.

Edited March 25, 2008 by Sparkster

[incognito]

obviously my point was that if you have a convicted pedo and take away everything else in his life then he is likely to focus more on his obsession - if for nothing else than boredom or loneliness. This makes them even more predatorial.

good reason why we should reserve capital punishment for these convicted pedophiles.

i dont see why tax dollars should be wasted on em.

its pretty black and white for me. abuse a child = forfeit of life.

if u are convicted of having sex with a child/infant,(and no im not talking about consentual sex between a 15yr old and a 16yr oldhere, im talking about seedy 'adults' forcing themselves on kids 0-15) convicted of viewing/distributing 'actual' child porn, well-sayonara out with the eyeballs.

i really dont see it as being that complicated?

[Torsten]

maybe my point is that I don't care if a paedophiles life is fucked for the rest of their lives. I think they deserve it for preying on the most vulnerable members of society in such a way.

One more time for the slow one....

I have no problem with the pedo's life being fucked up. The problem is that the more you fuck up a pedo's life the more likely he is to reoffend. So in essence you are saying that all you care is about punishment, but not about the potential harm these unrehabilitated offenders will do in the future. These people don't disappear from the face of the earth just ebcause you lock them up for 10 eyars. That's what I meant by your shortsightedness. But as I said, this is endemic as people just want to feel righteous for the moment without thinking about the future.

Try to explain your righteousness to the child that gets molested by the same offender 10 or 20 years later. An offence and a ruined life that might have been prevented. We should be doing more to protect children in the future rather than focussing on feeling righteous in the present. if that requires a different approach then I think we need to explore it. The current one certainly isn't working.

[Torsten]

its pretty black and white for me. abuse a child = forfeit of life.

personally I am against the death penalty for one simple reason. Not because of that bullshit concept that life is sacred, but because there are MISTAKES!

The advances in DNA technology have shown us just how many people on death row are there as a result of lies, mistakes and corruption. I don't think we can take that risk with an innocent life. So unless someone is caught on tape while engaging in sex with a child I really can't even bring myself to consider the death penalty and I wonder how you could live with yourself knowing full well that sooner or later an innocent person will be killed because of your simplicity. It might even be you.

[XipeTotec]

One more time for the slow one....

I have no problem with the pedo's life being fucked up. The problem is that the more you fuck up a pedo's life the more likely he is to reoffend. So in essence you are saying that all you care is about punishment, but not about the potential harm these unrehabilitated offenders will do in the future. These people don't disappear from the face of the earth just ebcause you lock them up for 10 eyars. That's what I meant by your shortsightedness. But as I said, this is endemic as people just want to feel righteous for the moment without thinking about the future.

Try to explain your righteousness to the child that gets molested by the same offender 10 or 20 years later. An offence and a ruined life that might have been prevented. We should be doing more to protect children in the future rather than focussing on feeling righteous in the present. if that requires a different approach then I think we need to explore it. The current one certainly isn't working.

you can call me slow all you like torsten... belittling people is a great way to make your opinion seem more intelligent.

Edited March 25, 2008 by XipeTotec

[Sparkster]

i dont see why tax dollars should be wasted on em.

It actually costs absurd amounts of government money to constantly have to review the constant appeals with dealth penalty cases, funnily enough it costs the American government over three times the total cost to put someone on death row then to have them in prison without parole.

its pretty black and white for me. abuse a child = forfeit of life.

As Torsten said "The advances in DNA technology have shown us just how many people on death row are there as a result of lies, mistakes and corruption. I don't think we can take that risk with an innocent life." Jono, I strongly recommend you watch a documentary called "Deadline" the death penality isn't even worthy of being an option.

if u are convicted of having sex with a child/infant,(and no im not talking about consentual sex between a 15yr old and a 16yr oldhere, im talking about seedy 'adults' forcing themselves on kids 0-15) convicted of viewing/distributing 'actual' child porn, well-sayonara out with the eyeballs.

Jono, you would *love* some Muslim countries that have Sharia law, they do lots of whacked out shit like that, they also stone woman to death if they try and divorce their husbands... They have that same enthusiasm for law enforcement.

"Abuse a child = forfiet a life"

If that were the case Jono there would be a hell of alot of australian children without parents. Should their own parents be put on death row? I think you'd be surprised how much sexual abuse is actually done by step parents or foster parents.

[ThunderIdeal]

i'm sitting here wondering what kind of preventative measures/education could be used, to stop people from becoming pedophiles in the first place. what factors lead a person to become a pedophile?

[Sparkster]

Just to try and keep this thing... on track.

I dont think we should focus on shitting on other people because they simply want they same objectives as ourselves, although a different view about the relevant approach.

No one should be accusing anyone of not caring enough about the issue, the fact that theres been alot of discussion about it shows that everyone is sternly against it.

Theres a concensus that sexual abuse of a minor is horrific.

We all agree that viewing material of any sexual abuse is horrific also.

We are just at odds at the appropriate levels of punishments, and possible methods of prevention....

[Sparkster]

i'm sitting here wondering what kind of preventative measures/education could be used, to stop people from becoming pedophiles in the first place. what factors lead a person to become a pedophile?

Always wondered about that, I never understand what people could possibly get off of. There seems to be a degree of people who were abused as kids who grow up to have a perverse perception of normal sexual behaviour, and have sought the same type of sexual encounters they had experianced at a young age.

Personally I'm not sure about that theory, doesn't exactly explain why it happened in the first place, and its certainly no indication that people will grow up to have the same behaviours.

I'm gay myself and have found my gay friends seem to have had a higher representation of sexual abuse growing up. I have 2 gay friends who said they experianced sexually abuse as a kid, another gay friend said he had sexually encounters as a kid with someone older, but that they were consentual and he enjoyed them and didn't see them as abuse. (even though he was like 8 or 9!?!?)

There is 1 straight friend who was molested by his next door neighbour. This is hardly a scientific ratio though... Needless to say it astounds me how many people I know have been abused as kids. They're not fuck ups either, they are all very normal people!

[Torsten]

you can call me slow all you like torsten... belittling people is a great way to make your opinion seem more intelligent.

It's not a matter of different opinions. It's amatter of you quoting me out of context and completely ignoring parts of concepts that MUST be read together.

It's not your opinion that sucks, it's your reading skills [or possibly just your shit stir attitude, not sure]

[Vertmorpheus]

I have always acted my age, as pretence is an art made so much more appealing by being left to the professonials.

Stoking? Guess it could be viewed that way, but, if you knew me in the flesh you'd think differently... and see that saying that is more a reflection on yourself than anyone else . Does it still work? Or does it only work for whoever gets it in first? You really could write the Puffin Book of Internet Witticisms and make a packet, hey. Well done.

Just because someone seems rational, healthy minded and bright enough doesn't mean they're not actually a bit fucked in the head. Stalin was hardly a mental defective, but his ...interpersonal skills needed a little work. I know plenty of with-it enough people who dont seem to be foaming at the mouth, have catlike eyes or sleep hanging upsidedown... but I still know they're snakeshit crazy in some ways. Not all pedos wear overcoats and carry bags of lollies, and not all pedos are big on hurting kids...some are "doomed" to having the impulse AND the empathy, and I'm sure live horribly unfulfilled existances. Doesnt sound very nice, and if they rock up somewhere BEFORE doing anything evil and say " i have these horrible thoughts, reckon you can fix me?", then I'm all for them... we none of us chose who we turned out to be, really.

I entirely agree with the words on rehabilitation... what people tend to forget though is that prisons are not in the business of rehabilitation, police are not in the business of sentencing, and magistrates are not in the business of prisons. Most prisons here are now privately run for profit, and that leads to all kinds of bullshit... don't get me started there. I simply didn't think it was within the scope of the topic at the comic book-esque level we were discussing it. I personally am in favour of lifelong imprisonment at the outside, no castration though, sounds a bit Suddam-esque? Then you have to find people willing to injure healthy bodies and bla bla... all gets a bit murky in there.I can't see that playing out too nicely in the proposed super bamboo ethno village of the future, either. Blood n viscera getting all over the drying racks, having to keep a pet psychopath, a militant agent to carry it out... most unseemly.

Certainly having one or two mistakenly obtained images on your PC shouldnt earn you a lifetime, IMO, or a shooting, a chopping, or a lopping...but then you were too busy accusing us of lumping everyone into one basket to realise that some of us, hadn't set about doing that at all... hard to see, from way up there? I can also appreciate that someone with a much, much more ...primal...stance on the matter, would think I sounded a bit soft. I can't appreciate that someone could hear me essentially say "kiddy porn is wrong, and that whole cop thing sounds a bit fishy doesnt it" and somehow decide I want peoples heads lopped off, have taken to the bottle or have otherwise taken leave of my senses. Or THEY'RE busy lumping ppl into baskets and in which case, can only deserve similar treatment in return anyway?

Methinks you have a touch of the old martyr envy going on there, with a sideserving of persecution anxiety. Common enough, bit of first world guilt can work wonders.... just dont go heaping it up and using it as a platform to imply the rest of us are either acting like children...though that is a nice touch, given you talk of welfare for children with one glove puppet but then use their construct as a term of denigration. Bit like a man with a deep awarness of and empathy for the feminist cause calling his mate a "woman" for being shit at fixing cars or something, isn't it?

Call me old fashioned, but when people start saying such rational and intelligent things as

"you just want to jump all over innocent people cos u want to do it yourselves!", .... hm. Bit of a worry isnt it?

"You are responsible for a portion of the crimes commited due to your attitude. Better a harmed child than someone jerking off"..... How? Is it a medical problem youre born with, or not? Get it together and bring it back to me in the morning.....

"Well, tobydoo, at least you are not in favor of locking up or executing those who only think about it. That is far more lenient than I believe most of the others are.".... Most? Less than half? Who's counting.

never mind the rest...the generalised tone of "theyre saying mean things about my hobby...woops, went a lil TOO far, back it up...phew"... the quotes eerily similar to many, many kiddy fiddlers that have turned up in cells over time... the instant and seemingly tangential introduction of animal sex and necrophilia... which were mentionedin such a way to indicate that he kind of expected us to be somehow "cooler" with that than the subject matter we were actually talking about?

All to me make him sound off his rocker. You don't have to think he is, and I'm not about to call anyone about getting him psych sectioned either, he said some silly shit in a chatroom and certainly wont be the last. but he did kinda seem to be saying "legalising child porn will reduce the incident of child sexual abuse" AND sounded like a bit of a deev himself, on a public forum known for its tendency to attract kind, gentle people that feel deeply for others pains... and yet you get the high n mighties with us for daring to say, essentially "you sound like a bit of a nong, do you realise what youre actually saying??. Ooooo k then.

I thought you were always up for a lil "second rate media watch"? Did you actually read what stonie wrote? All of it? Fuuuucked up stuff in there. Not in that raising a difficult question way either, just...thats a lil TOO much empathy for the cause , from where I stand anyway.

My principle objection with stone (other than coming across as a bit of a sex offender in the making, to be honest, I never called his basic ability to function in day to day life in the slightest) was the implication that providing material that gratifies a socially and personally harmful impulse will, in any way, serve to reduce the incidence of people acting further on that impulse. Not "images in conjunction with rehab" or "images in conjunction with monitoring" just sit there, rub yourself raw over digitally done up images of lil kids being ripped, and you'll be instantly less likely to ever actually harm a child. Legalise, leave em too it, no worries.Ah-hah.....Sounds a bit like "give junkies a copy of trainspotting and theyll get off the gear" or "let kids watch heaps of movies featuring dangerous alcohol use and theyll not want to get drunk themselves".

You might claim hes bright otherwise, but as far as solutions go, thats about as bullshit as I've heard on any front for a while now. I haven't seen him do his tax return or drive a car, talk to a stranger in person or make a lasagna... there is no doubt that some of the most deranged people of all time have been amongst the most intelligent anyway, so its largely immaterial. You think no sicko ever had mates? family? a job? casual acquaintances? wake up. Sorry, bit rude telling another adult how to act isnt it, but since it seems part of the ethos now....

I was talking for the most part about reasons why the material is NOT ok... I certianly never said "shoot the bastards" or "lock em up forever and throw away the key" OR for that matter, "lumped everyone into one basket"... although saying "looking at pictures of a child being raped is just as bad as raping the child yourself", in different words, sounds a bit onebasketish to me?I agree with you, incidentally, give or take some details, but cmon... it sounds a bit jackboots n formation marching, at the end of the day. Why is it ok for you to say that, but not us?

That seems to be a recurring phenomena? "hey you lot, dont act like arrogant narcissists who think you have the last word on everything, now shut up and retrain yourself to think in line with the material or opinion I just provided."

Remember, if you ever have kids, they dont remember what you say, they remember what you do.

I personally see no connection at all between the state going after child abusers, and the state going after collectors of obscure and largely unrecognised plantlife... marginalised taboo indulgers... oooo k then. I'm about as marginalised as... the people living in homes all around me.the rest of my family. I don't live in a fantasyland, i assure you. I cant indulge ALL my hobbies in the street without attracting attention, but then, most people cant. Plenty of things that are entirely legal but still... noone needs to or wants to see. So we keep em to ourselves. Not out of shame, just out of consideration for people that arent on the same trip. Theres pride, and theres pomp.

I suppose I can see the link as far as people having mutual interests in dismantling the mechanism of state persecution, but to say that I should be more tolerant of say drink drivers, or someone saying "detailed computer games simulating drink driving will reduce the number of people doing it for real", simply because people happen to be intolerant of certain of my lifestyle decisions, thats just bollocks. Having some dust on your hands doesn't mean you can't tell the fucker with muddy boots to get off your carpet.

Maybe I'm just a grumpy old breeder and nowhere bohemian and enlightened enough to think that someone that seriously suggest legal kiddy porn will reduce offenses against children, and THEN set about abusing people who dare to say they disagree, is some kind of "brother in arms by default ". But then,I'm certainly not hep and connected enough to know (let alone mention) anyone that maintains contact with children, and indexes of them, for the purposes of later using them in pornographic work either... I guess it's a pair of brown slippers, The Australian and a couple of Bex for me! Perhaps a brief romp in the afternoon, every couple of months, strictly missionary of course... otherwise just weak tea, ABC reruns and a well thumbed copy of "Mein Kampf" ,or perhaps "How to Kill Freaks and Influence Policy".

You cant make claims about valuing community but then discount any response from it that you dont like the sound of as juvenile or inept, unfounded or poorly informed. At least not without sounding like a bit of a fascist. Your purdy lil site doesnt run in isolation, its a community yes, its not a closed community..and largely it seems to overlap with the basic standards of australian society, basic human decency, etc. We don't think kiddy porn is a good thing, and we dont think anyone that says it is, is the full quid either. Its our opinion, we are not only allowed to hold it, but I believe have reason to hold it. Like free thinking adults you can take on all the asme information as someone else, bound by ANOTHER set of "social constructs", and come to a different point of view. or is that not allowed around here anymore?

Howzabout we get over the "that guy said the wrong thing, hes narrow minded and set bound!" routine? Its pretty pissweak really.Token self-marginalisation is a fairly unbecoming trait, but common enough, so it bothers me little.... but I eat vegemite on toast every morning, tough shit. Not because Sir Joh or John Laws tell me too, but because I like it. And when I eat legumes and wholegrains for tea, its not a political statement, its not different for difference sake, its personal choice n taste based on the facts and opinions I had at the time, and havent questioned since. Some of us actually happen to like having reasonably regular lives, give or take the odd affectation or deeply held belief. It shouldnt be used against anyone that happens to disagree with whatever the spice flavour of the month club thinks is gospel.

Corroberee? I must have blinked...

VM

edity bit... I'd recommend either saying I waffle on, or can't write very well... failing that ignoring it, or coming up with something clever and oh-just-so could be good too. Theres a few hooks up there you can use. And about the belitting people... any response there, or you just going to call the obviously wordy, subliterate?

Edited March 25, 2008 by Vertmorpheus

[XipeTotec]

My principle objection with stone (other than coming across as a bit of a sex offender in the making,

vert!! although my attention span makes it impossible to read your posts... i do try to skim through them sometimes, since that time u pissed me offabout something... im glad I did, cause the above quote cracked me up!

[Torsten]

Needless to say it astounds me how many people I know have been abused as kids. They're not fuck ups either, they are all very normal people!

I think gay guys are more likely to talk about their abuse than straight guys. Straight guys would probably be as 'comfortable' talking about being abused by a woman as gays are about being abused by men. ie for straight guys there is an added hurdle of disgust in admitting their abuser was of the same sex.

Gays in general have so much more sexual 'stuff' to deal with that they are better equipped to resolve these issues.

As far as victims being fuck ups, I would think that most probably aren't, but I would also be surprised if the abuse did not have ANY impact on their lives, especially their sex lives. The gay guys I know who have been abused are all of the non-committal type, so maybe that is a feature of their lingering damage.

I have one close friend who was 'abused' when he was about 11. Parents found out and caused a huge drama about it. He says that he never viewed it as abuse, was never forced to do anything he didn't want to do, and generally got his rocks off in a more satisfying way than most of his classmates. What did damage him was the fact that the neighbours found out as a result of the drama the parents caused and soon enough everyone in his class knew.

Not that the abusers behaviour should be condoned, but it is just one example of how other factors can actually be more damaging to the child than the abuse itself. A year later he was cruising the beats in melbourne at night looking there for what he had learnt was not safe to do at home. He did look a few years older than he was, but I am sure some of his encounters thought they'd died and gone to chicken heaven.

I know this is an extreme example, but for those who are trying to neatly stuff all this into one simplistic box it is important to understand it just doesn't work like that. I personally don't think most 11 year olds could give informed consent [in the logical sense, not the legal sense], and looking back at my own life I can only guess that I awoke from my child naivety at about 15 or 16, so again the problem is that the law needs to protect the most vulnerable and the slowest developers, but in the process becomes irrelevant for a lot of others. Age in years is simply not a good marker. I look at my newphews and kids of that age group and it just blows me away how early some of them became sexually active.

Sparkster - as you have probably noticed, I am always trying to differentiate between people who have urges towards minors who are sexually active/mature [in particular the 16-18 year olds who were classed as children in NSW until recently] and those who specifically seek children who are not sexual beings in any way shape or form. I think the former group is a difficult one and the legal system has learnt to recognise this. The latter group however is pretty clear cut and I am pretty sure there is agreement in the psych profession that attraction to non-sexual minors has nothing to do with sex, but rather with control [where sex is just one of the tools for exercising control]. Accordingly I would assume that these two groups would need to be treated differently in rehabilitation and prevention.

As for prevention, I don't think anyone knows. It is really quite surprising how little we know about these things. I think those attracted to adolescents are probably responding in some way to the commercial ideals of beauty and the western ideals of the trophy shag. I really can't see how this applies to the pre-teen child molesters though as these victims have no features of these sexual ideals. The fact that all pedos have been thrown into the same basket for so many years is probably also responsible for the fact that there is not a lot of epidemiological data available for them. ie, while one group might be the result of advertising or general cultural influences, the other group might be the result of specific events at home either in childhood or in adulthood.

[Torsten]

Vert -

I've read all of stoney's posts and no, I don't agree with much of what he said. But he did not lead this convo down the cartoonesque path - he did follow though.

This thread was dominated by 4 main characters

stoney - who was trying to talk about alternative

jono- who has a simplistic solution because it is easy and satisfying

tobydoo+1 - who is pretty new here and started treating stoney like a child

vert - who likes to fan the flames

xipe - the monkey

we've all heard what jono has to say because he often repeats it and anyway, we could just open the editorial section in any conservative newpaper for similar views. These views and methods have failed dismally. Just look at countries where such simplistic laws have been in force for a long time.

I am not sure what tobydoo+1 are on about because I really couldn't find much content in their discussion, although I ahve the feeling +1 has a lot to say on this issue if she was not being confronted as much.

vert - I like your generally open minded approach and if it wasn't for your constant admin persecution complex I would actually engage in discussion with you. But you do like to stir shit and you do it well, and in this thread it really did not help.

xipe - likes to throw in some randomness. Sometimes it helps, this time it didn't. In a serious discussion you can't just take random bits, quote them out of context and expect to be respected.

So, as much as I disagree with stoney, he is the only one who is even willing to think, consider and discuss alternative options.

In regards to the similarities drawn between pedophilia and other taboos, I agree there is no comparison. Not in the western world anyway. But that's my point. "western world" is just a social construct, whereas humanity goes well beyond that. So while in the west pedophilia is pretty much at the top of the list, in many other countries you will find homosexuality to be the top of the list. And just like the moral majority in Iran stones gays to death or hangs them by the neck from cranes in the town square, if we do similarly barbaric things to the offenders at the top of our list then we are not much better. That's where the comparison becomes relevant. So no, you can't compare a poof to a pedo in australia, but you can compare the cultural constructs around homosexuality in Iran with the cultural constructs around pedophilia in australia. [btw, I am using Iran as a well known example. plenty of other countries treat homosexuality at the top of their list].

As for castrating people, I think an elegant way to solve themoral dilemma of forced castration would be to make it voluntary. ie, give the person a choice between life incarceration or castration. It was their choice to commit the offence in the first place, so I have no problem with such a severe punishment, especially as it actually results in full rehabilitation from the condition. And as I said, I'd only favour this for repeat offenders as I think it is unlikely for someone to get wrongly convicted twice. There are already similar schemes in place where repeat offenders can take hormone pills that effectively castrate them temporarily. The problem is that repeat offenders are usually not the most honest and reliable people.

[cisumevil]

So, as much as I disagree with stoney, he is the only one who is even willing to think, consider and discuss alternative options.

I cannot find one post where stoney puts forward an alternative option but I might of missed it!

All stoney has said that viewing child porn whether it is simulated or real should NOT be an offence as their actions are NOT harming anyone & that it prevents them from offending! That’s a CRAZY statement as Vert has wisely said, Just because we view a drug movie it does not make us say well that’s cool and leave the experience at that, no it inspires us to try these substances for ourselves does it not? I imagine kiddy porn has the same effect as it desensitises the offender and gives them the idea that they can take their obsession to the next level and get away with it just as the offenders did in his/her viewing material. I’m NOT saying that everyone that views Child porn will go on and commit offences but I bet it would be very very hard to find a convicted offender that had NEVER viewed child porn before he/she committed an offence in fact I would say that 99% of convicted offenders would of started watching child porn before committing actual offences!

And stoney what is your alternative option for people caught viewing child porn?

Edited March 25, 2008 by cisumevil

[XipeTotec]

xipe - the monkey

again, trying to dismiss someones opinion by belittling them. It isnt a becoming trait Torsten, and it doesn't make you any smarter. You have actually got it all wrong, I wasnt the monkey, Stoney was, not for trying to talk about an alternative, as you claim, but for coming across like a total deadshit, by saying, total deadshit things.

Edited March 26, 2008 by XipeTotec

[XipeTotec]

offence in fact I would say that 99% of convicted offenders would of started watching child porn before committing actual offences!

I didnt read your whole post...ooooohhhhhh torsten... im going to take something out of context!! , but I can't agree with the above statement, as child molestation has been practised well before the internet was able to provide such images on mass to society.

[XipeTotec]

In regards to the similarities drawn between pedophilia and other taboos, I agree there is no comparison. Not in the western world anyway. But that's my point. "western world" is just a social construct, whereas humanity goes well beyond that. So while in the west pedophilia is pretty much at the top of the list, in many other countries you will find homosexuality to be the top of the list. And just like the moral majority in Iran stones gays to death or hangs them by the neck from cranes in the town square, if we do similarly barbaric things to the offenders at the top of our list then we are not much better. That's where the comparison becomes relevant. So no, you can't compare a poof to a pedo in australia, but you can compare the cultural constructs around homosexuality in Iran with the cultural constructs around pedophilia in australia. [btw, I am using Iran as a well known example. plenty of other countries treat homosexuality at the top of their list].

bizarre point torsten...yes, some cultures may be intolerant of gays, but that is still not a good comparison, as no culture on earth is accepting of paedophilia as defined as sexual relations with a child under puberty age.

[Vertmorpheus]

Attempted persecution via doubting and mocking allegations of misuse of a position of authority... now THAT'S familiar...

so... "And just like the moral majority in Iran stones gays to death or hangs them by the neck from cranes in the town square, if we do similarly barbaric things to the offenders at the top of our list then we are not much better." wouldnt have any similarity to say... i dunno...giving people the dubious impression of "choice" ie life without liberty, or life without balls for being at the top of OUR list, would it? Bit like saying "go to war for us, or we'll shoot you..." and then claiming they're all "volunteers" for the cause surely? Feel free not to discuss that, due to my only being here to "fan the flames". Maybe do your own backburning once in a while, and reduce the fuel load if you're that concerned about it. Pity this hasnt come at the convenient end of a thread so it can be ignored and pushed down the thread list hey?

Many sexual predators use non-penile means to tormet victims, many rapists for example are actually incapable of getting an erection at the moment of assault anyway, so settle for the nearest rough object, beer bottle, whatever it takes to tilt the power balance more their way so the fear of criticism thing is offset by the victims fear of suffering thing..THEN they can bar up enough to get dow nto business. This has all been looked into, many, many times. You think a eunich never fingered someone? You think the cum is somehow inherently more offensive than the cock itself? Castration has a patchy effect on libido, and at any rate sexual inclination and powerplay inclination, whilst surely interrelated, would seem not to be entirely interdependent. My dog has no nuts, he still spends a lot of time sinking large teeth thru small animals given half a chance, still huffs n puffs when people walk by... CHemical intervention has been found more useful, but then, if the state is a Scary Man for putting flouride in the taps for our own good, to stop tooth decay,or for banning chemical compound x, for our own good and to prevent moral or mental decay, are they any nicer for putting antipsychotics and other agents into human beings against their will for our own good, to stop social decay? Whole other kettle of fish there, anyway...but big bags of bonus points for bringing up "a point". The rest of us were just sitting here making funny faces and playing with our toes, til then.barring the sage suggestions of your old mate Stoney, that is Care to tackle what to do with FEMALE offenders? Out with their ovaries? The brain drives sexuality, not the bits. They're just one possible outlet for the impulse.

If making honest and deeply held comment about a subject matter (or two) that strike deep personal chords, for a variety of reasons I wont go into (a truth is true in its own right... not true because of the past of the person making it, I'll say that much) makes me a dissenter, then mail me the nametag and I'll wear it with pride. Or keep it, and use it to poke your pet monkeys so they squawk back at you... not quite having a relationship, but at least its relating with relatives, eh? My buttons are big and easy to find, neatly labelled and mostly of a highly predictable nature... being able to hit the odd one doesnt get you any points either. Its about as difficult as shoving a nana down some steps, getting me to open up.Ie not hard to do, but why would you do it on purpose?

Percieved intent is also neither actual intent, by default, and even if it was... a fanner of flames can still have a point. The ability of the "open minded" to completely write irregular particles out of their worldview never ceases to amaze me, but I can't respect it much. Its just pulling the wool over your OWN eyes.Surely thats what the glorious "movement" is trying to prevent the power structure from doing to its subjects and supporters in the first place?

There's a few words for a leader of a community (appointed or self styled) that tries to pass off as mentally defective anyone carrying a conflicting POV to their own line, theres another few for people that write off anyone holding a view not within that line as being simply "agitators" "anarchists" "detractors"...even when those views are well inline with what the rest of the community actually agrees with... shit.... cmon T, you wouldnt cop that kinda behaviour from anyone else, certainly not someone in a suit running a country somewhere... why do you think you're entitled to do it? Thats the issue here now. You want to be a leader, cool beans... lead by example. Dont break your own rules to try and get others to go along with em, otherwise we just assume that you never really believed in them in the first place and were wearing a costume to start with.

Free thinking is a fine thing, but only as fine as its outcomes... being able to suggest sickness as a solution to sickness takes some mental gymnastics thats for sure... but people can do all kinds of party tricks. Fuck em, who can't?. Show us the outcomes...even projected ones. theres no bonus poiints for just "being different" especially when its being done to reinforce a sense of auto-marginalisation. You dont want people to hate you by default or assume youre crazy for being queer, or liking plants, or any of that... why hand it out because fairly average aussies happened to commit the ultimate sin of sounding like average aussies? Did you read "the australian ugliness" one to many times, or what? Secret descendant of the melbourne arts set, maybe? Yep, we even put tomato sauce on everything, geeze we're SHIT.

Editorials can be shit, and many are... but theyre shit that is true enough to the average person... they are written to agree, rather than propose, despite the idealistic view of the media you seem to maintain, and to malign Jono for daring to have a socially typical viewpoint on such a heated subject just reeks of... some bullshit elitism to be honest. Some "my way or no way" mindset ... a mindset that has caused so much damage to what human society has the potential to be, that I wont bother going into it. You know what im talking about... I just think that the rest of us would benefit immensely from some honest self reflection rather than seeing yourself in stage lighting and makeup ;) Where would the fun be if we all just got out of bed rearing to agree with you? What kind of satisfaction could you derive from your own edginess then? Personally, I like that the world is full of people different to myself... it causes a few hassles, its true... but I wouldnt have it any other way. I find it amazing that if theres 40 homes in a street, you have 40 plus views of society in some ways but theyre as different as they are similar.

I feel about as persecuted as a hatrack around here, and if I was here to "fan the flames" trust me...this place would be a tumbledown tangle of burnt spars and dental remains... youve seen the material and players one could work with around here... a real stirrer would have a great day out. But feel free to just pass off my daring to point out (inline with my own personal and cultural background, of course) that you're acting like Mussolini whilst calling everyone else close minded or inept for having the gall to call someone that sounds like a fucking fruitloop, a fucking fruitloop. So stone raised a few points...who hasn't? How is "let em look at kids" carry any more weight than "off with their heads"? what you mean to say of course is that his was more in line with your artfully dionysian outlook, more difference for difference sake, and stands a better chance of providing sensualists and self marginalised types with things to do on a friday night....whereas ours sounded a bit like the "construct bound society" that you claim to revile on one hand, whilst profiting from it on the other.

You're nothing special, I'm nothing special, Xipes nothing special.... youre certainly nothing special for running a nice website, though you do run a nice website...i said as much in my 1003.5th post and on many other occasions... but in the same way that being able to use a dishwasher doesnt mean stoney isnt a deviate, being able to run a business, manage a lil online tribe and keep yourself amused all at the same time doesnt mean you're not prone to acting like a ghastly little hitler albeit from a hairier and herbier point of view.if anything, I can see how that personality type would make someone more efficient at doing all the above and more. Cracking up because the dreadfuls took a long hard look at your blatantly suspect sounding setup because they thought it might be breaking some social standards itself....but then trying the social purist routine yourself just stinks. If you dont want me to mention that it stinks, stop stinking. Or at least stop bleating about every lil time someone else gets a bit whiffy themselves. It's the "opinion to end all opinions" routine that the plebs are getting pitchforky about... but bummer is, even if you were Caesar, I'd STILL tel lyou what you aren't pleased to hear.

Wow, now am I different and clued in and fighting the good fight or WHAT ,my glorious horde of untermenschen? Keeping the bastards honest, ra rar ra. See? It's nothing clever. It's just turning the thorn in the paw into words in the air. Stop putting thorns in our path, and we won't have to mention them. "put up or shut up" really isn't very attractive, doesn't make you look any more intelligent, it just tends to make you look like a person you either really arent, in which case why put that image out there, or really are, in which case why carry the "free living and open minds" banner if you dont really believe in them? Surely youre not proposing a society where noone is allowed to make observations upon the standing and conduct of its own "ruling class"? Because they have words for that, too...

The world cannot and will not ever be run according to T's Little Red Book, no matter how entertaining you think that'd be. It would certainly be more entertaining than say Rudds Little Red Book, but cool and groovy and illuminated doesnt necessarily keep the lights turned on does it? And I don't think the average family unit would do all that well in the face of "lets just fuck with all the rules because pointing out a ludicrous alternative is better than just going with the way things are despite the fact that the majority actually agrees with them being that way".

Many good ideas are new ideas... but not all new ideas are good ideas... and few are as new as they seem. I can see how you ended up stuck on that trip, i did it myself for a couple years, but then worked out that the old ways end up old for a reason... they work. Maybe not real well, and the odd tinker couldnt hurt in some cases... but they start and run and steer and most of us are ok with them. Stickign wings to the family car just because noones done it yet isnt clever, and isnt worthy of anything other than polite amusement. It doesnt mean the creator is a genius, a member of the intelligentsia, just means they have a neophilic disposition. Which is once again, entirely cool. And very natural. And a natural part of that, is that its meant to work at cross and co-purposes all at the same time with more neophobic elements of society, so that we end up with a standpoint that (ideally speaking) ends up halfway between both extremes. So noones really happy, but the pain is shared around, you could say. Its how we DO things, we humans. Drop by and take a look sometime, you might be surprised.

But eh, wouldn't bother discussing it... would seem that people either take it or leave it, cos christ knows youre already perfect... not a perfect system from the sounds of it,but I can see how itd come in handy, nice way to ensure you have fairly limited exposure to anything like objective criticism or being called to stand by your own professed values as a "leader".

Or is it ruler? Because neither seem very true at the moment.

Which is sad, because the potential for both under the same crown is promising. I think you're a nice enough character, and you might be able to remember me telling sooks in other threads that you werent being nasty, just clearcut... but I can't keep that up in all instances. I have a bit of a columns n sceptres trip myself, no denying it, but I try to keep it to myself and hold dominion over say... houseplants, rather than virtual strangers entirely entitled to their own views on things. I think a world run by me would be nice too, but I don't expect anyone else to agree and I certainly wouldnt crack the shits with them for daring to tell me so. And if I did end up running it, my first steps would be to neither "reeducate the masses" OR try to make people feel bad just for making a bit of common sense.

There is a reason I don't have membership at EA, edot, shroomery, any of those... I like it around here. maybe I'm just one of the more stubborn rats on the galley, who knows. And you're to thank for the bones of it, and a good deal of the flesh, too. The rest is the members, and I think any "community minded" type should be more appreciative of those that take it upon themselves to draw attention to the presence of maggots and flies that would stand a chance of damaging the organism we've all helped to grow here, on the patch of dirt you provided. Or was it meant to be a garden of mutant forms only, and all us typical forms are just taking up valuable weirdo space and making your other previous acquired specimen/s look a lil... mishapen and sick?

Feet of clay the people can handle, and in time even come to love... its the words of shit coming from what seemed like a heart of gold that leaves us disappointed.

VM

ps, Xipe, I think under trad law in Iran and a few other place,s girls as young as nine are married off, but whether theyre meant to be put to "use" or whether you're "allowed" to touch em til menses, I couldn't say. Probably the original law was written with more pure intent in mind, but how things ar emeant and how things are done generally differes.But there are a few ppl around that aren't quite as offput by kiddyfiddlers as I feel they should be, few places around the world.

Edited March 26, 2008 by Vertmorpheus