Police arrest 184 in worldwide pedophile ring: Europol

[Sheather]

Nah I don't want to read all of your BS

If you can't be fucked getting a background stop jumping up with assumptions. It's your choice, learn the subject matter or keep making a fool of yourself.

Ok my error?

You'd probably want to read through said quoted posts. You'll find that you jumped the gun (again) and you are in error. I'd explain it to you, but you'll just jump the gun again.

Your post #60 your words

Don't mention anything about me being a paedophile actually.

then your post #130 you say in reply to my question So how old were you thinking about in that 4-13yr range?

Yes, probably closer to 8-10

so in your own WORDS by your definition you are! I don't know if it is true - I would rather think not, and that you were really here just to show us how smart you are with words but they are your words!

If there was an olympic medal for making assumptions and not reading the facts, you would be in the running for gold. Past tense, as in, before but not now, I feared I might be. I did not fantasize over children even during that phase, and that phase is some way behind me. I didn't have to show anyone how smart with words I am until you blundered in and made a mess of every argument you've made.

and by the way Thinking is acting. Thinking is deliberate thought.

And here is the medal winner! You're a gold medalist now! Why do you think you had to specify that thinking is deliberate thought? I'll tell you. Because not all of it is. Sure that running commentary in your head when you think to yourself is deliberate, but what of all the thoughts unbidden? Tell me you've never thought of anything except with explicit intent.

I'm done with you Dworx. You take up more of my time than you are worthy of (none).

Edited March 23, 2011 by Sheather

[dworx]

If you can't be fucked getting a background stop jumping up with assumptions. It's your choice, learn the subject matter or keep making a fool of yourself. LOL, yeah I'm the fool LOL.

You'd probably want to read through said quoted posts. You'll find that you jumped the gun (again) and you are in error. I'd explain it to you, but you'll just jump the gun again. Umm that''s what I said?

Don't mention anything about me being a paedophile actually. I didn't ave to did I you already outed yourself.

If there was an olympic medal for making assumptions and not reading the facts, you would be in the running for gold. Past tense, as in, before but not now, I feared I might be. I did not fantasize over children even during that phase, and that phase is some way behind me. I didn't have to show anyone how smart with words I am until you blundered in and made a mess of every argument you've made.

Sorry feared you might be? Well if you had sexual thoughts of 8-10 year olds [sorry bud that was your reply] - ah fuckit who cares - I am sorry for you, really.

And here is the medal winner! You're a gold medalist now! Why do you think you had to specify that thinking is deliberate thought? I'll tell you. Because not all of it is. Sure that running commentary in your head when you think to yourself is deliberate, but what of all the thoughts unbidden? Tell me you've never thought of anything except with explicit intent.

I'm done with you Dworx. You take up more of my time than you are worthy of (none).

Very good, but let me just tell you That, as you may have figured, I see pedophiles from the other end of the stick, You have talked to your friendly great pedo people, well I have talked with victims and sorry any compassion for the offender whether in thought or deed, is disgraceful, if you really beleive that those thoughts are harmless thoughts, and that kind of thinking is harmless and showing acceptance to these animals is good, then you are as low as they are, irrelevant of whether you were or thought you were one of them. What really disturbs me is the number of people that put there hand up to defend what you are saying, I know the number wasn't majority but its a percentage and that's disgusting to me. And just so it is clear - if I was the parent to a victim, I would hunt that fucker down and slice his heart out, think what you fucking like, you are a weed.

Torsten if you want to ban me for this be my guest if this is the level of even some of the people here I don't wish to be here.

Edited March 24, 2011 by dworx

[Torsten]

I've had various requests to intervene in this thtread, but I am tempted to let it run because it presents each poster very accurately. There are the ones who try to understand this condition & crime and there are others who just want to string them all up. We know from past experience that the latter option does nothing to protect the victims but we also know that many innocent accused end up victims themselves - think witches, gays, commies, etc. Our media hyped pleb culture needs witches to persecute, so ask yourself if you are part of that game/industry.

Those who try to open up a discussion about how to approach this in new ways get shut down by those who don't want to think about it at all. So who is in the end the one to blame for the continuing suffering? The more we understand about this problem the more we can tailor treatments. Blindly threatenign violence has never advanced us anywhere.

Like I said, everyone is showing their true colours here. Just ask yourself whether your position will change anything for the victims or just make you feel superficially better in yourself.....

[dworx]

I am sorry T but I understand it from the other side, there is no excuses for depraved sexual acts on children, I understand what you are saying if you say witches, gays, commies have been taunted etc unnecessarily and I would agree, but this is degenerate, It is natural for a parent to protect defend and revenge their child, and it is natural for a victim to want the worst for the offender. I am not talking from media perspective either, so no I am not a part of the game and definitely not the industry.

[Sonny Jim]

edit: reply to torsten

For sure, I like what you have written so far and I have enjoyed the discussion (argument, to be fair) so far. I would agree that people have been showing their true feelings about paedophilia. I think it is hard to have a conversation about the topic without it breaking out into an argument that people take personally. For me, the argument was about a perceived lack of compassion for the victims of child sexual abuse. When people tried to describe paedophilia as being comparable to anything that I would consider truly sexual urges, comparing it to homosexuality etc. I felt like people were trying to make light of the dark side of paedophilia when they said that. I think that a thorough understanding of the devastating reality of pedophilia is importrant in a discussion that tries to further our understanding understanding of it. I agree that standing in the way of better discription of pedophilia doesn’t help anyone.

Edited March 24, 2011 by Sonny Jim

[herbal_hindsight]

All I want to say is I am surprised and deeply disappointed at how petty, accusing, nasty, judgemental, hateful and downright appalling this thread is.... but still not as appalling as the topic the thread was posted about to begin with... [bEFORE IT TOOK A TURN]

there are a lot of people on this forum it seems need to grow the fuck up, open their mind [a lot wider] and learn to accept that not everyone has the same knowledge, experiences, beliefs and opinions as you do!

at the end of the day, i'd just like to think we all agree on one thing

that the suffering of a child in any way, shape or form [especially that of sexual assault and not just limited to children] is not acceptable and everything should be done to eradicate the scum of this earth who think otherwise!

[dworx]

edit: reply to torsten

For sure, I like what you have written so far and I have enjoyed the discussion (argument, to be fair) so far. I would agree that people have been showing their true feelings about paedophilia. I think it is hard to have a conversation about the topic without it breaking out into an argument that people take personally. For me, the argument was about a perceived lack of compassion for the victims of child sexual abuse. When people tried to describe paedophilia as being comparable to anything that I would consider truly sexual urges, comparing it to homosexuality etc. I felt like people were trying to make light of the dark side of paedophilia when they said that. I think that a thorough understanding of the devastating reality of pedophilia is importrant in a discussion that tries to further our understanding understanding of it. I agree that standing in the way of better discription of pedophilia doesn’t help anyone.

 

Sonny Jim, you are a light in this darkness

I think there are people here who are making light of it. Forget the victims life sentence. Forget their inability to trust anyone, forget their tortured minds butto the victor go the spoils. The thoughts of sexual nature with children and esp. the actions from some, are inhumane, not loving and extremely damaging.

[ballzac]

Forget the victims life sentence. Forget their inability to trust anyone, forget their tortured minds butto the victor go the spoils. The thoughts of sexual nature with children and esp. the actions from some, are inhumane, not loving and extremely damaging.

 

Can you please explain how thoughts cause any of the above? I am certainly not making light of anyone's suffering. I do not have a lot of sympathy for anyone who actually hurts children, and I am well aware of how profound that suffering can be. I do, however, feel that it is much more constructive to help the victims and to prevent further abuse than to torture the perpetrators, and in cases where no suffering is being caused at all (thoughts are the focus of this argument...thoughts people), I think it is completely wrong to feel that a person deserves some kind of suffering inflicted upon them.

Edited March 24, 2011 by ballzac

[CβL]

As my last point, I just want to make this face: -_-

And say that some people here simply don't understand how debating works. You don't discuss topics based on personal connotations of words. You use the definition, which I have provided earlier (albeit the child molester one was a bit iffy). Pleading ignorance due to other people's misuse of a word does nothing but lower you to their level.

Not all thoughts precipitate actions, and not all actions precipitate from thoughts.

[random]

After reading the previous page here and none in between since I started ignoring the thread, I'm going to jump back in with my last 2cents, i'd say 10cents but I feel others would disagree that I have even that much to offer, such is their ridicule previously directed toward me

Are thoughts not energy?

Can abusive thoughts not give off energy to both the thinker and the one(s) being thought about?

Are ongoing sexuals thought (whether acted upon or not) about babies and children not harmful then?

Yes, they are harmful as they create energy that can impact on others, some people are sensitive to bad energy, especially children who often dislike people from first impression with no particular obvious reason not to like them.

Therefore IMO pedophilia still disgusts and disturbs me, however you interpret the meaning of it.

Furthermore I am the mother of 4 (count them) children and I see virtually every single time (that I visit a public place such as a shopping center) particular people giving my children more than the usual smile or glance, but a prolonged look up and down which disturbs me.

As a mother it is my job in life to protect my own children.

So when I see someone taking an overt prolonged visual interest in any of my children, I feel an urge to remove them from the sight of the person doing the looking.

I've done this many times with obvious and subtle action.

Whether pedophiles (i'm saying this in the terms of mentally ill individuals who have sexual thoughts for children but have not necessarily acted upon them) are innocent of acting upon their urges or not, they are most certainly not innocent of conveying their negative energy toward children.

And unless you are a parent with young children who takes an active interest in your own surroundings and who has a strong desire to keep your children safe from harm both actual and intended then you have zero way of understanding how I have come to the conclusion that I have.

And i'm not reading anymore of this thread so feel free to criticise me further, question or *correct* me all you like as i'll be happily oblivious to all or any of it.

[ballzac]

Whether pedophiles (i'm saying this in the terms of mentally ill individuals who have sexual thoughts for children but have not necessarily acted upon them) are innocent of acting upon their urges or not, they are most certainly not innocent of conveying their negative energy toward children.

 

Actually, a common thing with child molesters is that they make children feel good about themselves and the situation before taking advantage of that trust that has been built up, it's called grooming. I do not believe that children generally pick up on 'negative energy' from child molesters, which is what makes them so dangerous.

And i'm not reading anymore of this thread so feel free to criticise me further, question or *correct* me all you like as i'll be happily oblivious to all or any of it.

 

Somehow I doubt that

[bℓσωηG]

Pedos are the worst kind of scum....

but how does this make you feel when its a woman doing the violating? Strangely appealing? I do not agree with it at all as the boys were too young and she did abuse her position in the school. Detention anyone?

School mistress jailed for abusing boys

Thursday, March 24, 2011 » 02:51pm

A school house mistress who sexually abused six boys is to be jailed for at least five years.In the NSW District Court on Thursday, Judge Anthony Garling handed down the minimum term while sentencing the 41-year-old woman to a maximum eight-year term.

The judge in December found the woman, who cannot be named for legal reasons, guilty of 21 sex offences involving boys, aged 11 or 12, who attended the NSW school where she worked.

The 2009 offences included 18 counts of sexual intercourse, involving fallacio and penial-vaginal penetration.

The judge rejected the woman's defence of mental illness, but found she was suffering from a bipolar disorder at the time.

The sentencing is continuing.

 

http://bigpondnews.com/articles/Crime/2011/03/24/School_mistress_jailed_for_abusing_boys_592911.html

Edited March 24, 2011 by blowng

[Sheather]

particular people giving my children more than the usual smile or glance, but a prolonged look up and down which disturbs me.

This saddens me. Often on the bus or in a public place when I see a child I am tempted to play with them (or speak if on the bus) just because they're masters at making people smile. If they're playing games or having a conversation then I will watch them, but if the parents are visibly uncomfortable I will back off. Puts a dent on the smile though.

Somehow I doubt that

As do I.

I do not believe that children generally pick up on 'negative energy' from child molesters

Nor do I. I believe children pick up on whether you're acting genuine or not. If you're smiling and talking to them but thinking "god just shut up you stupid kid" they'll not like you, but if you're actually interested and don't treat them like a baby then they're happy to chat.

[tripsis]

That article comes with remarkable timing blowng.

I think generalisations either way are not going to be a sufficient answer to either side of the argument. Every situation and every individual is going to be different. Many paedophiles are paedophiles are a result of their own childhood abuse. Does this make them bad people, because they were traumatised while their minds were still developing? Yet one cannot argue that despite how they have come to be the way they are, that if they live out their fantasies, the crimes they commit are unforgivable.

Sheather admits that at one stage thought he might have been a paedophile, yet believes now he is not. But by the logic of some here, because he entertained that idea for a period of time, he should be strung up. Is that really what you want?

I agree that paedophilia is extremely problematic and for those who go as far as abusing children, whether directly or indirectly, I have very little compassion towards. It's not only the children themselves who are abused that suffer, but often, as the cycle goes, they go on to become paedophiles, thus perpetuating the problem for untold generations. Thus I think offenders should never be given the chance to reoffend. Just one offence could lead to thousands through the cycle I described above. This means that every offence has potentially far reaching consequences and could be felt for many, many years after the event.

I know at least two people who were sexually assaulted as children, both of them very close to me, so I feel very strongly about this subject. One of them was molested on numerous occasions, the other was attacked by a group of men while she was on a beach, at the horrifyingly young age of 5 or 7 (I forget which one). If I had the opportunity, I wouldn't hesitate to exact revenge upon those scum, despite the fact that neither of my friends want that. But what good would it do? It would make me feel better, but it would probably make me a worse person too. One positive I would see in it is that those people who perpetrated those offences would no longer remain to do it again to other children.

I don't think it is as black and white as many would like it to be. There is no easy, uniform answer for what to do or how to do it.

[Auxin]

I was trying to avoid this thread but its like a traffic accident, you just have to look

...Furthermore I am the mother of 4 (count them) children and I see virtually every single time (that I visit a public place such as a shopping center) particular people giving my children more than the usual smile or glance, but a prolonged look up and down which disturbs me...

What makes people think they know whats going on in others heads? And what makes them so sure of their psychic abilities that they are willing to hate, harm, or even kill over their assumptions? I'm not saying I doubt that at some point a pervert has had a gaze at meekas, or anyone elses, kids but a whole universe of different thoughts are possible when looking at someone. Assuming everyone that seems to stare or look at a kid without reason thats apparent to the parent is a pedophile speaks little about the looker but volumes about the parent. As a male I'm often subject to parents discrimination and blind unfounded assumptions.

Theres been times I glanced at a kid and then stared thinking 'my god, what are they feeding that kid? she'll have heart disease by the age of 18!!' only to be stared down by the clinically obese child abusing mother who no doubt thought I was somehow having impure thoughts about her fat and diseased kid. Theres been time a mother backhands her 4 year old across the face in the store because he did something wrong and when I look to see if the kid is bleeding and I smile at him, woah shit the mom looks like shes about to call the cops. Theres been times I see a cute little girl in the park then just kind of stare blankly in her general direction thinking 'hmmm, wonder if I'll ever want kids, would a daughter hate me if I named her rainbow? Could I find a hippie commune school like the one I grew up in?' then when I come to, woah shit, daddy looks like hes gonna beat me to death with a baseball bat.

If thats not enough for you I remember a case not long ago a man saw a 7 year old walking toward traffic. He knew perfectly well if he tried to stop the girl and turn her around he might be beaten, arrested, or even shot. And even if he was found innocent his career would be over just from the accusation and his marriage might even fail. He walked away hoping the mother would notice her kid. The kid died. The court deemed the man to be at no fault because, yes, it could have ended his career or his life.

As bad as child abuse is, abuse of innocent people to "protect" children is also horrible... and very common.

Moreover its psychologically unhealthy to obsess over hatred for some faceless imaginary archetype of a perceived adversary. It disappoints me how many in this community degrade themselves by cultivating such hatred.

Torsten is right, this thread speaks volumes about the character of many of its participants.

[solomon]

http://en.wikipedia....icy_controversy

Qantas and Air NZ both have a policy of sitting unaccompanied children next to females but not males.

Edited March 25, 2011 by centipede

[ThunderIdeal]

One positive I would see in it is that those people who perpetrated those offences would no longer remain to do it again to other children.

 

and if there is a part of the self that carries on to play a part in the universe, it might think to itself "oh now i remember, my actions have consequences"

[hutch]

and if there is a part of the self that carries on to play a part in the universe, it might think to itself "oh now i remember, my actions have consequences"

 

Nice reminder....they do...

[ThunderIdeal]

i have wondered whether deleting a bad person means that their soul can't learn as much as it might have, also it reincarnates all the sooner, eg only making the problem worse down the track

[dworx]

This saddens me. Often on the bus or in a public place when I see a child I am tempted to play with them (or speak if on the bus) just because they're masters at making people smile. If they're playing games or having a conversation then I will watch them, but if the parents are visibly uncomfortable I will back off. Puts a dent on the smile though. Aaah yes I think ballzac said it's called grooming. Yes the parents pick up on the type of person, that makes them feel uncomfortable [ My child is under threat], I understand.

[bℓσωηG]

Children are grown up spirits in small bodies... dont mess with spirit, OR ELSE!

having kids myself ...i am at times overly protective / paranoid of f'cked up individuals also...

[ballzac]

Negged for being unquotable after being told more than once. It's annoying dude. You're forcing others to put in extra effort if they want to be involved in a discussion with you. Bad netiquette man.

[Sheather]

Negged for calling me a paedophile again. Also reported.

[qualia]

Aaah yes I think ballzac said it's called grooming. Yes the parents pick up on the type of person' date=' that makes them feel uncomfortable [ My child is under threat'], I understand.

believe me i thought for more than a moment before joining this.

but thats not grooming. i like to watch kids play, i think they have a fantastic and beautiful view of the world, it's unadulterated and everything seems so new to them. it really does get to me when someone will label me some sort of monster because i should happen to be in the same vicinity as their children. i think society has amped up this threat so that anyone who doesn't turn their head at a child is automatically some sort of sexual predator. should i run away whenever a child comes within 10 feet of me? seriously, you need to distinguish between a real threat and someone passing on the street. open your eyes man.

[dworx]

Negged for calling me a paedophile again. Also reported.

First I have never called you a pedo and second I thought you were done with me?

{/quote]