Oh, cool, we got from a robot-posting to the tune of "let's cut people who say pedophilia is a sexual orientation" straight to "cut up pedophiles right away" in just a wink. Who would've thought... except of course anyone who knows this happy little fun place.
We need, like different words for “people who are attracted to minors because there is a brain malfunction,” “people who are attracted to minors because they get off on the power imbalance,” and “people who are actively/have actually had sexual contact with a minor.” Cause one of those needs help, one needs involuntary commitment, and one needs jail.
Tried already with "MAP". Then it got hijacked and used to try and normalize offenders.
This is my line in the sand, pedos can all either keep themselves in line, or they can bleed, drop, and die. No normalization. No protection. Don't even flirt with the idea of giving an inch on this subject.
3
deleted
· 3 years ago
I don't know so much about american politicians, was Joe Biden the one sexualizing his own daughter, when she was still a minor? And the one who bragged about entering locker rooms full of half naked minor girls on a regular base? And the one hanging out with Jeffrey Epstein for years, ogling very, very young women?
▼
·
Edited 3 years ago
deleted
· 3 years ago
Abel, we have those words. Number one is called pedophile, numbers two and three are called criminals.
Why are you here if you didn’t wanna sling shit? This whole site is either sling shit or pat all our friends on the back for agreeing with us. I say sling shit man, it’s the only thing that makes this site interesting anymore.
deleted
· 3 years ago
He usually stops when even he recognizes how absurdly fucked up his position is.
Or are you actually just trying to defend pedos in general? As much as I hate Biden in particular, that stance would be a hell of a lot worse.
1
deleted
· 3 years ago
I'm merely defending the correct use of words, while you're calling Biden a pedophile for really nothing at all while actively ignoring someone bragging about being sexually attracted to minors, repeatedly. We all know what you would say if Biden ever bragged in public how he loved to intrude teenage girls locker rooms. Just some of us choose to ignore that as well.
I love how a post having nothing to do with politics still devolves into a dumb argument about Biden vs Trump. Both are bad. But please continue as this is entertaining for me.
@abel_hazard Just scooting over here because there's no hope of a productive conversation in the other chain
`
tbh I'm not necessarily sure you do need separate words. If someone is attracted to children and willing to talk about it in time to get help, no one other than them and their support system necessarily need ever know about their proclivities.
`
Trying to label it a sexuality and go about the political correctness route has, as @famousone has said, only endangered more children so far.
`
Currently on social media the word "pedophile" gets actively censored (to the point people talking about actual cases of assault and child rape can't even say the word).... But pedophiles are allowed to openly and loudly tell everyone what age child they would like to rape. And 8/10 it's not in a manner that has anything to do with getting help.
`
People openly will brag about being attracted to children using terminology like "MAP" - and a lot of people have no idea what that word means.
`
The end result so far seems to have been people who are attracted to children being given even more access to children, and being protected while they talk about raping children - which is never a good thing remotely. And to be clear I do mean they talk about raping children. As young as a day old. And for a large part none of what they say is about getting help
I wouldn’t expect to find category 1 people talking about it on social media. It’s one of the few things you can realize about yourself where shame and fear are ABSOLUTELY the correct response, and barring them being themselves still minor and not understanding where or how to get help, I’d expect the only place they mentioned it to be a close confidante or a licensed mental health professional. I’m absolutely for regulating and deplatforming open talk condoning child rape, and while incarceration isn’t an option unless an actual plan or conspiracy to commit can be proven, it’s a situation in which commitment should be considered.
It might help the therapy process for someone to be able to identify themselves as someone with that attraction *without* using the same word as is used for someone who has committed child rape. There is the argument, though, that the “oh god oh god OH GOD” mental reaction people (hopefully) get from it being the same word would spur them to get help faster, but people’s responses to fear can be counterintuitive, and for obvious reasons that’s an ethically sketchy subject to try to run a study on.
I think most people with the attraction that don't offend and DO want help for the most part don't want a label at all. But I will openly state I have encountered almost none of that I can recall. But I would think you would be able to speak to your therapist if you truly wanted help, without saying "I'm a pedophile."
`
I have encountered the other type - those who DESPERATELY want to rape a child (or who have), and are chomping at the bit to have Pedophilia labelled a sexuality so they can begin to set the normalization of child rape in motion.
`
And it is the secondary category that have completely corrupted the term MAP. MAP used to be intended for people who had the attraction, hadn't offended, and wanted a safe way to seek help
The fact seems to be that it doesn't seem to matter if we give category 1 people a term separate from pedophile because pedophiles claim the term for themselves. If the option is between adults with the desire for children being afraid vs the normalization of child rape... I'm afraid I'll always have to go with the first option
deleted
· 3 years ago
Bitch, what you encountered is the twitterverse and you don't seem to have enough fiber in your diet to be able to tell it apart from the real, outside world. You need to face the fact that there have always been and will always be a handful of sick assholes, and just because you stand close to them and place your ear directly at their mouths doesn't make them any more in numbers or any louder than they always have been. The only difference you make is spewing out even MORE hate and aggression into this world. On fucking social media, kinda ironic. What Abel so gloriously put as the "“oh god oh god OH GOD” mental reaction".
There’s a counterpoint to be made there that this is a particularly delicate issue; normally one might be able to dismiss the effects of a vocal fringe as minimal, but in this case the effects potentially include a child being assaulted or worse. That’s an issue where an individual instance is still of tremendous importance. Otherwise, I’d end up arguing that just because the Euphemism Treadmill exists doesn’t mean we don’t abandon harmful terms. I’d like to be able to find a solution that addresses both needs, to accomplish both a) not allowing any of the monstrous people any extra opportunity to harm a child while b) still minimizing suicides, or worse, transition to the other categories, among people who have a brain disorder. However, barring that, I kind of have to err on the side of protecting the children.
2
deleted
· 3 years ago
Fully agreed. Still - not addressed to you of course - I don't get how shouting "Death to pedophiles" is helping anyone or how trying to be rational about it would endanger anyone. Generally demonizing anybody with a wrong desire otoh is distracting everyone from the fact that most sexual attacks on children come from "normal" men, who have wifes and girlfriends. When everyone just looks for "pedos" and what they believe they can see as "tell-tale signs", the "normal" dads and uncles and neighbors take their chances. We need to prevent with open eyes and knowledge, we need to persecute offenders and need to keep perpetrators away from children. None of the aggressive rhetorics of GI Joe and his hyper sycophant do help any of this.
Better for them all to stay in their holes than think for even half a second that they've been "normalized" or "validated".
And any offenders that do pop their heads up? Better to have them removed than to let plea deals, lax enforcement due to sympathy, or "pandemic precautions" let them back on the streets.
It's the same deal for druggies or crazies. I do not care that you "don't know any better", or "felt like you had no choice", or "didn't actually want to hurt anyone".
deleted
· 3 years ago
At this point you're sort of speaking in tongues here, and it's your spinal cord talking, not your brain. Which otoh surely won't be much of a difference...
Sadly I think the statistic is something along the lines of 80% of people who have offended once will offend again.
`
I followed a case for a little while involving a guy who attempted to make arrangements with a mother of two underage girls (like 14 and under) to turn them into his sex slaves. He wanted collars, he wanted to groom them to worship him, etc. He spoke extensively with the mother about how they would transform them into his perfect sex slaves.
`
Except the mother was an FBI agent. Before leaving to meet her (and a couple times in the course of the conversations) he expressed concern that maybe it was a set-up. And also resignation that it would be one.
`
When they caught him he requested that they please don't tell his grandparents what he'd been arrested for.
`
It was a very odd look into the mind of an almost-offender where he both seemingly was somewhat repulsed by his own actions, yet did nothing that I could see to either seek help, or stop himself -
I'll simplify it just for you: Zero tolerance, no sympathy. They can get help or keep themselves in line, but will never be normalized or accepted. And if they do offend? Kill them or lock them in a box and throw away the key
Even in the face of his life being destroyed.
`
I hope he is getting the help he needs, but at the end of the day, if he isn't supervised, the likelihood that he will attempt to rape a child again is extremely high. He will need to either be locked up, or kept in close check for the rest of his life. If he had managed to connect with a real person willing to sell their children (which is far less common than it seems), that child would have to live forever with the scars he left behind.
`
i've listened to the stories and/or spoken with at least a dozen victims of abuse, people who work with both them and the offenders
`
One tells the story of an offender who filed his teeth to points. He liked to use his teeth on his victims. I don't remember if the child survived or not.
`
Then there are the people who are like 23 and have sex with a 17 year old and are put in the same category as a pedophile when often that's not the case.
`
There are the ones who brag openly in prison about the children they've raped and how they intend to rape again. There are the ones in positions of power who are never held accountable for the lives they've destroyed. And then there are the falsely accused, who often never escape the stigma. Which, aside from the fact that it is entirely ineffective, is part of why castration (or the female equivalent) isn't a solution.
`
There are nuances to every issue. But at the same time, without letting ourselves get bogged down in the incessant diatribe of labels, it does become incredibly simple:
`
Does the person in question want to rape or abuse a child?
`
Are they actively seeking ways to prevent this from happening?
`
If the answer is anything other than yes, we now have a problem.
The problem with demonizing the perpetrators of a particular sort of offense is that it frequently leads to people thinking that a “normal” person couldn’t possibly do that, which leads to people getting away with it. I mean, Dean Corll? Nah, everybody knows Dean, he runs the candy factory. (Yes, there are other factors, such as insufficient police growth and prioritization of wealthy districts. There is always a confluence of factors. But none of Dean’s acquaintances thought it could be him. Not even his storage facility manager, despite the fact Dean’s lot smelled undeniably of corpse.)
The problem with leniency in terminology is that it often offers protection for offenders, is often ineffective, and complicates an issue too important to be complicated
`
Which is kind of the same point we've gone round about on already
`
And it's not an issue exclusive to the pedophile discussion. Political correctness never works in the long run in the face of human nature. we have I don't even know how many terms for people with learning disabilities, and many of them were once the socially acceptable version of an older, previously socially acceptable word. The original socially acceptable version gradually became offensive and had to be replaced. And the cycle has repeated ad naseum
`
I'm not sure what the solution is - if there is one at all
Hitler loved children and animals, and flirted with his wife even on camera.
Most serial killers anyone has ever heard of were by all accounts "charming". Even most street thugs are loved by their mothers.
We can't shift an entire perception just to account for the willfully ignorant. They're the same kind of people who think "That can't happen here, not to people like me", and that's entirely on them.
“There are the ones who brag openly in prison about the children they've raped and how they intend to rape again.” Can you cite any example? I’ve been to jail and trust me, these fuckers hide as much as they possibly can and any known pedo gets threatened/bullied daily til they check themselves in to protective custody l
Oh hai!
,
Look at this! A somewhat coherent debate on something I have studied :D There's a crazy-good book my Marilyn Callahan and Tim Buckley entitled "S.O. The New Scarlett Letters" that I would highly recommend to anyone interested in what makes an offender and who they are and how to help keep our communities safe with them running around after they've been released. There's also a bunch of statistics on rainn.org about sexual assault and conviction rates, recidivism (reoffending), etc.
,
Sex offending is a mental health issue. Healthy, well-adjusted people do not offend. It wouldn't occur to them. Unfortunately, lots of people don't know what to look for if they think of themselves are mentally healthy. Rates of offending are high because we, as a society, are kinda bungling things. We can fix it fairly easily though. I’ll get to that in a sec.
,
@abel_hazard, you are correct: different styles of offending have different root psychoses or pshycopathies.
Sadists will offend for an entirely different reason than a pedophile will offend.
,
There are six root causes of offending. They are detailed in a book called “Treating Sex Offenders” by Stinson and Becker (another great read, but it reads more like a textbook than “Scarlett Letters.”) I don’t have the book in front of me right now, so I can’t remember the other four root causes off the top of my head.
,
The main takeaway from the brain malfunction idea, though: 19 out of 20 offenders will be driven to victimize someone because that offender is lonely and doesn’t know how to handle it or that offender is angry and doesn’t know how to handle it. These account for 70% of sexual offenses.
,
The other 1 out of 20 is the stereotypical sex offender that makes everyone’s blood run hot. They are the proud, bragging, sadistic, a**holes that should be exterminated, and that are rotting in prisons all over the world. This 5% of the population accounts for the other 30% of sex offenses.
Also, to clear it up, very few people brag in prison about victimizing women or children. Those braggers will be beaten or killed pretty quickly if they don’t PC up. Even in protective custody, other sex offenders will happily beat the stuffing out of that type of inmate. The guards look the other way.
,
Another random clarification: sex offenses have the second-lowest recidivism rate. @xvarnah, the rate is 8%, if the offender completes sex offender treatment. If they do not, it’s 24%. With most crimes, you’re looking at 60%-90%. The only crime that has a lower recidivism rate is murder.
,
What do we do to protect ourselves and our communities? Here’s a couple easy thoughts:
,
There are stages to someone programming themselves to commit a sex offense. The first is deviant thoughts. If all deviant fantasies when away today, all sex offending would stop today. Society is doing a piss poor job getting that word out: everyone knows what a deviant thought is.
The more you entertain them, the more you normalize them. When it’s a sexual thought, you are reinforcing it in the most powerful way if you are getting off to it. Potential offenders think they’re “blowing off steam” by diverting their deviance to masturbation, but they aren’t. They are very much doing the opposite.
,
Everyone knowing that would cut down offenses in a big way. Teaching men (and women, to a lesser extent) healthy ways to cope when they feel lonely or angry will massively decrease the rate of sexual assault.
,
Fun fact (from rainn.org): 5 out of 1,000 sexual assaults lead to a conviction. *FIVE* I have plenty of advice for legislation that could bump that up, but just educating people about deviant thoughts and coping mechanisms could potentially influence 700 out of 1,000 of those offenses. Then the courts could start focusing on the real predators who are laughing in all our faces right now.
I was debating tagging you here Jason haha
`
I don't have time to read and reply to all of this currently, But just to clarify: the stat for re-offense I had was without treatment or supervision. Basically a pedophile released back into the world with no one monitoring their behavior on a regular basis.
`
Granted it could be a stat that is no longer accurate, or perhaps inflated somewhat(?) - I genuinely couldn't be say. I believe it came from people previously employed to work with offenders and victims
`
With supervision and treatment, child rapists do have far less opportunity (and perhaps desire - that's something that's hard to measure)
Yeah, lmk when you read it. I was referring to the 19 out of 20 with that stat. Pedophilia takes a lot more supervision and treatment and a willingness on the part of the offender to change. They can, and do.
,
So to clarify on my part: I don't know what recidivism rates are for people with a diagnosis of actual pedophilia and history of offending. I can assume they would be higher than 24%.
TYVM for the book recommendations! @xvarnah: I see your point and have to agree with you in the specific case of pedophilia terminology, but have to disagree with the point as a whole. The euphemism treadmill is an ongoing thing, certainly, but adapting to culture and circumstances as they change is a part both of every discipline and of language use as a whole (shit, the main chronic disease I have has gone through four goddamn names since diagnosis, based on the changing understanding of how it works. My doctors all being at different phases of the conversation also does not help.) Refusing to acknowledge that the context and connotation of a word has changed limits communication from both sides. For instance, if someone were to insist upon using the term “incel” in the sense and context in which it was originally coined, they could end up saying a number of unintentional things ranging from confusing to heinous.
In a weird twist I was looking into the word paedophile and apparently it was originally intended to more or less mean someone who has the inclination but doesn't necessarily offend. And then it was taken over to largely be accepted as meaning someone who has raped children. So people invented MAP. Which now is largely synonymous with pedophile.
`
But since we're on the subject, where do child sex dolls fall in all of this from what you've observed @jasonmon
`
I'm also curious what, if anything, your research has shown on female predators
Actually Marilyn Callahan, from my first book recommendation above, designed the first female sex offender treatment.
,
Women offend for different reasons than men and tend to rank higher in manipulativeness and be more strongly in denial about the negative effects their offenses have had on their victims (who are usually adolescent boys or girls.) The research shows women usually prey on adolescents to feed their ego and feel wanted when they are in loveless relationships.
,
I've been in touch with Tim Buckley several times and, after COVID, I hope to be able to lead a treatment group of inmates at Oregon State Prison. We'll see!
,
I'm almost afraid to ask about "child sex dolls." What is that?
,
The -philia suffix means "a fondness for." So a felinophile is fond of cats and an atmosphere is fond of atomic explosions. In medical terms, a "-philia" is referred to as a paraphilia and it's something different. It's not fondness.
It's that the focus of the paraphilia has to be present or sexual arousal cannot be achieved. There's podophilia, which means a true foot fetish; there's macrophylla, which means a fetish for giants; there's autogynephilia which is a make who can ONLY get off thinking of himself but as a female.
,
Here's a wiki on a huge number of them:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_paraphilias
,
As you can see, there's dozens of them, and there's help available for people stuck in whatever paraphilia they've programmed themselves to "need". Most of them don't victimize another human, but some obviously do. That's why it's so sad the word isn't out there yet to equip people with yellow and red flags so they don't go down a rabbit hole and ruin their lives, or worse, victimize someone.
Child sex dolls are sex dolls ranging in forms of realism (some hyper realistic) that are designed specifically to look like children. They are banned in many places
`
Some people make the argument "better a doll than a child..."
`
There was a controversy awhile back where a company seemingly took a photograph of a child a woman had uploaded and attempted to replicate it with their sex doll
`
You can read more about it here:
https://childrescuecoalition.org/educations/child-sex-doll/
@famousone True I have not been to a state prison and there is quite the difference, but you’d be surprised how lenient sentences can be for pedophiles, especially first time offenders.
@alekazam Politics are very much alive in Oregon prisons: bad charges = rough ride. But it's true: first time offenders won't usually get a ton of jail time, but they do have to turn around and register as a sex offender. @famousone A sentence of <1yr is jail and >1yr is prison.
,
@xvarnah I see. Yes. Child sex dolls would not be something supported by any healthy community. No sexually deviant thought is healthy. The only time someone should immerse themselves in deviant thoughts is if they're alone with their victim of choice (this thread has talked a lot about children, but there's clubs with drunk girls, or alleys where a victimizer might be alone with a potential victim, etc) and they feel out of control enough that no other coping mechanism is going to work. Then they need to excuse themselves and go masturbate.
,
A doll like that isn't a last resort. It's sharpening someone into a rapist. I can see why they're banned.Anyone deep enough to want a doll is deep enough to need help
Btw, is there a known difference between kink and paraphilia when it comes to the “indulging the fantasy approaches desiring the reality” thing? Cause I have kink fantasies (nothing involving children or nonconsent, thank God) that I’ve had for quite a while that I really, 100% do not want to happen in real life.
This is where I gotta part ways with you. Toys may be crossing a line, but all that shit about "deviant thoughts" is just something I can't agree with.
Toys or artificially created materials (i.e. porn created without involving an actual minor) may be crossing a line, but there’s no functional way to police people’s thoughts. If it’s true, though, shouldn’t it still be widely known that indulging in the fantasies strengthens rather than diffuses them?
@abel_hazard There is a big difference. A kink is something that's fun and maybe gets you off. It can be an expression of healthy sexuality. A paraphilia is something that will be more consuming. You won't be able to get off unless you're focusing on that one thing exclusively. My friend tells a hilarious story of a guy who could only get off by wrecking a car. He was always getting arrested for stealing cars and wrecking them to get off. It's a funny story, but the guy clearly needed help.
,
@famousone I don't think people should be prosecuted for transient thoughts. But I do recognize that people will tend to make their thoughts in to reality. That's fine when it's someone healthy. But people can get in to an echo chamber of negativity and need help getting back out. When someone might get raped, deviant thoughts are a bigger problem. It's relatively easy to change them.
Once the rapist-in-accidental-training starts following girls home from school or driving by playgrounds, they are taking more tangible steps towards an offense while telling themselves that they're just blowing off steam and doing what they need to so they don't hurt anyone.
,
Basically, if you are hiding your thoughts from friends, partners, loved ones, you need to understand you have found a "yellow flag." You aren't technically harming anyone, but you are focused on harming someone. It's not healthy.
,
Again, you shouldn't be punished for having thoughts. But there should be more of a discussion of what thoughts lead to you to a dark place. No one is born a rapist. How come there's so many of them? I think it's because we don't have enough of these types of discussions.
Ok, so it parallels the approach/rationalization patterns serial killers follow (well, I’ll just buy the materials and stash them where I might think about something like that. … I’ll just pick out which house I *would* approach…”)
@abel_hazard I just saw your follow-ups. I definitely don't think anyone should be policing anyone's thoughts except the person thinking them. My hope is people will realize, before they get to a very dark place, that they are heading in to that dark place.
,
Porn that simulates being with a child sexually or portraying a child sexually isn't healthy and is actually illegal in many jurisdictions around the world. The reason being exactly what we're talking about.
I haven't studied serial killers. That is interesting the approach and rationalization are the same. I know it takes some pretty powerful cognitive distortions to victimize a human. I guess I'm not surprised the same distortions would apply to murder as well as other terrible things.
I also notice a weird motivational parallel in the gender differences. Men are conditioned to seek power as a condition of success; most male serial killers and child abusers have an element of dominance or control in the crime (product killers = control over the corpse, process killers = control over life/death). Women are conditioned to seek social status, most easily signified either by wealth/stability or desirability; most female serial killers kill for money (most!) and you said above female child abusers abuse to feel desired.
Tbh the child sex doll thing has been made more complicated in part because of things like novels, movies, art, and books.
`
Lolita being probably the most infamous example, which follows a man who becomes obsessed with a pre-pubescent girl to the point he eventually murders the girl's mother and then kidnaps the girl, who he calls Lolita (Idr her real name).
`
This book is, iirc, is connected by name and in themes to the Loli/Shouta genre from Japan (which features people who either ARE children, or who bear a strong resemblance to and/or the mannerisms of a child). It's also why Epstein's plane was known as the Lolita express
`
There are games such as "Rapeplay"(sp?) In which you play as a man who stalks a mother and her two daughters (one around 15 I think, and the other probably 11 or 12). The game focuses on the man raping each character individually, and then together for the end of it
`
There are sex dolls and dildos that are also designed to look like various animals or their anatomy as well, and, ofc, the various depictions of animals being fucked and fucking
`
Yet most people that consume these... "media" formats (and toys) don't seem to have any actual interest in fucking children or animals in reality.
`
The argument usually seems to be that no real person is actually being harmed.
`
Child sex dolls do seem to have been banned largely, as has the game "Rapleplay" - but to many Lolita is considered a classic of a sort.
`
And then there is media like Cuties in which several dozen underage girls were encouraged to produce provocative videos that are now owned by some adult, to do with in private what they wish. Which become more concerning when you know Sundance is involved and they have a convicted pedophile working there iirc. A select few of those girls were chosen to be turned into pedophile eyecandy.
`
Real children have been endangered by that movie, but it is regarded as "art"
`
I guess my point with all this is that it seems to be a very complicated subject. And there seems to be very little consistency in how or why we choose to ban something when it comes to this. We do seem to be slightly more inclined to ban if it is something that suggests action rather than mere exposure, however
This is my line in the sand, pedos can all either keep themselves in line, or they can bleed, drop, and die. No normalization. No protection. Don't even flirt with the idea of giving an inch on this subject.
I'm not in the mood for slinging shit today. Pedos can all hang, fuck China Joe, have a nice day.
`
tbh I'm not necessarily sure you do need separate words. If someone is attracted to children and willing to talk about it in time to get help, no one other than them and their support system necessarily need ever know about their proclivities.
`
Trying to label it a sexuality and go about the political correctness route has, as @famousone has said, only endangered more children so far.
`
Currently on social media the word "pedophile" gets actively censored (to the point people talking about actual cases of assault and child rape can't even say the word).... But pedophiles are allowed to openly and loudly tell everyone what age child they would like to rape. And 8/10 it's not in a manner that has anything to do with getting help.
`
`
The end result so far seems to have been people who are attracted to children being given even more access to children, and being protected while they talk about raping children - which is never a good thing remotely. And to be clear I do mean they talk about raping children. As young as a day old. And for a large part none of what they say is about getting help
`
I have encountered the other type - those who DESPERATELY want to rape a child (or who have), and are chomping at the bit to have Pedophilia labelled a sexuality so they can begin to set the normalization of child rape in motion.
`
And it is the secondary category that have completely corrupted the term MAP. MAP used to be intended for people who had the attraction, hadn't offended, and wanted a safe way to seek help
And any offenders that do pop their heads up? Better to have them removed than to let plea deals, lax enforcement due to sympathy, or "pandemic precautions" let them back on the streets.
It's the same deal for druggies or crazies. I do not care that you "don't know any better", or "felt like you had no choice", or "didn't actually want to hurt anyone".
`
I followed a case for a little while involving a guy who attempted to make arrangements with a mother of two underage girls (like 14 and under) to turn them into his sex slaves. He wanted collars, he wanted to groom them to worship him, etc. He spoke extensively with the mother about how they would transform them into his perfect sex slaves.
`
Except the mother was an FBI agent. Before leaving to meet her (and a couple times in the course of the conversations) he expressed concern that maybe it was a set-up. And also resignation that it would be one.
`
When they caught him he requested that they please don't tell his grandparents what he'd been arrested for.
`
It was a very odd look into the mind of an almost-offender where he both seemingly was somewhat repulsed by his own actions, yet did nothing that I could see to either seek help, or stop himself -
`
I hope he is getting the help he needs, but at the end of the day, if he isn't supervised, the likelihood that he will attempt to rape a child again is extremely high. He will need to either be locked up, or kept in close check for the rest of his life. If he had managed to connect with a real person willing to sell their children (which is far less common than it seems), that child would have to live forever with the scars he left behind.
`
i've listened to the stories and/or spoken with at least a dozen victims of abuse, people who work with both them and the offenders
`
One tells the story of an offender who filed his teeth to points. He liked to use his teeth on his victims. I don't remember if the child survived or not.
`
Then there are the people who are like 23 and have sex with a 17 year old and are put in the same category as a pedophile when often that's not the case.
`
`
There are nuances to every issue. But at the same time, without letting ourselves get bogged down in the incessant diatribe of labels, it does become incredibly simple:
`
Does the person in question want to rape or abuse a child?
`
Are they actively seeking ways to prevent this from happening?
`
If the answer is anything other than yes, we now have a problem.
`
Which is kind of the same point we've gone round about on already
`
And it's not an issue exclusive to the pedophile discussion. Political correctness never works in the long run in the face of human nature. we have I don't even know how many terms for people with learning disabilities, and many of them were once the socially acceptable version of an older, previously socially acceptable word. The original socially acceptable version gradually became offensive and had to be replaced. And the cycle has repeated ad naseum
`
I'm not sure what the solution is - if there is one at all
Most serial killers anyone has ever heard of were by all accounts "charming". Even most street thugs are loved by their mothers.
We can't shift an entire perception just to account for the willfully ignorant. They're the same kind of people who think "That can't happen here, not to people like me", and that's entirely on them.
,
Look at this! A somewhat coherent debate on something I have studied :D There's a crazy-good book my Marilyn Callahan and Tim Buckley entitled "S.O. The New Scarlett Letters" that I would highly recommend to anyone interested in what makes an offender and who they are and how to help keep our communities safe with them running around after they've been released. There's also a bunch of statistics on rainn.org about sexual assault and conviction rates, recidivism (reoffending), etc.
,
Sex offending is a mental health issue. Healthy, well-adjusted people do not offend. It wouldn't occur to them. Unfortunately, lots of people don't know what to look for if they think of themselves are mentally healthy. Rates of offending are high because we, as a society, are kinda bungling things. We can fix it fairly easily though. I’ll get to that in a sec.
,
@abel_hazard, you are correct: different styles of offending have different root psychoses or pshycopathies.
,
There are six root causes of offending. They are detailed in a book called “Treating Sex Offenders” by Stinson and Becker (another great read, but it reads more like a textbook than “Scarlett Letters.”) I don’t have the book in front of me right now, so I can’t remember the other four root causes off the top of my head.
,
The main takeaway from the brain malfunction idea, though: 19 out of 20 offenders will be driven to victimize someone because that offender is lonely and doesn’t know how to handle it or that offender is angry and doesn’t know how to handle it. These account for 70% of sexual offenses.
,
The other 1 out of 20 is the stereotypical sex offender that makes everyone’s blood run hot. They are the proud, bragging, sadistic, a**holes that should be exterminated, and that are rotting in prisons all over the world. This 5% of the population accounts for the other 30% of sex offenses.
,
Another random clarification: sex offenses have the second-lowest recidivism rate. @xvarnah, the rate is 8%, if the offender completes sex offender treatment. If they do not, it’s 24%. With most crimes, you’re looking at 60%-90%. The only crime that has a lower recidivism rate is murder.
,
What do we do to protect ourselves and our communities? Here’s a couple easy thoughts:
,
There are stages to someone programming themselves to commit a sex offense. The first is deviant thoughts. If all deviant fantasies when away today, all sex offending would stop today. Society is doing a piss poor job getting that word out: everyone knows what a deviant thought is.
,
Everyone knowing that would cut down offenses in a big way. Teaching men (and women, to a lesser extent) healthy ways to cope when they feel lonely or angry will massively decrease the rate of sexual assault.
,
Fun fact (from rainn.org): 5 out of 1,000 sexual assaults lead to a conviction. *FIVE* I have plenty of advice for legislation that could bump that up, but just educating people about deviant thoughts and coping mechanisms could potentially influence 700 out of 1,000 of those offenses. Then the courts could start focusing on the real predators who are laughing in all our faces right now.
`
I don't have time to read and reply to all of this currently, But just to clarify: the stat for re-offense I had was without treatment or supervision. Basically a pedophile released back into the world with no one monitoring their behavior on a regular basis.
`
Granted it could be a stat that is no longer accurate, or perhaps inflated somewhat(?) - I genuinely couldn't be say. I believe it came from people previously employed to work with offenders and victims
`
With supervision and treatment, child rapists do have far less opportunity (and perhaps desire - that's something that's hard to measure)
,
So to clarify on my part: I don't know what recidivism rates are for people with a diagnosis of actual pedophilia and history of offending. I can assume they would be higher than 24%.
`
But since we're on the subject, where do child sex dolls fall in all of this from what you've observed @jasonmon
`
I'm also curious what, if anything, your research has shown on female predators
,
Women offend for different reasons than men and tend to rank higher in manipulativeness and be more strongly in denial about the negative effects their offenses have had on their victims (who are usually adolescent boys or girls.) The research shows women usually prey on adolescents to feed their ego and feel wanted when they are in loveless relationships.
,
I've been in touch with Tim Buckley several times and, after COVID, I hope to be able to lead a treatment group of inmates at Oregon State Prison. We'll see!
,
I'm almost afraid to ask about "child sex dolls." What is that?
,
The -philia suffix means "a fondness for." So a felinophile is fond of cats and an atmosphere is fond of atomic explosions. In medical terms, a "-philia" is referred to as a paraphilia and it's something different. It's not fondness.
,
Here's a wiki on a huge number of them:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_paraphilias
,
As you can see, there's dozens of them, and there's help available for people stuck in whatever paraphilia they've programmed themselves to "need". Most of them don't victimize another human, but some obviously do. That's why it's so sad the word isn't out there yet to equip people with yellow and red flags so they don't go down a rabbit hole and ruin their lives, or worse, victimize someone.
`
Some people make the argument "better a doll than a child..."
`
There was a controversy awhile back where a company seemingly took a photograph of a child a woman had uploaded and attempted to replicate it with their sex doll
`
You can read more about it here:
https://childrescuecoalition.org/educations/child-sex-doll/
,
@xvarnah I see. Yes. Child sex dolls would not be something supported by any healthy community. No sexually deviant thought is healthy. The only time someone should immerse themselves in deviant thoughts is if they're alone with their victim of choice (this thread has talked a lot about children, but there's clubs with drunk girls, or alleys where a victimizer might be alone with a potential victim, etc) and they feel out of control enough that no other coping mechanism is going to work. Then they need to excuse themselves and go masturbate.
,
A doll like that isn't a last resort. It's sharpening someone into a rapist. I can see why they're banned.Anyone deep enough to want a doll is deep enough to need help
,
@famousone I don't think people should be prosecuted for transient thoughts. But I do recognize that people will tend to make their thoughts in to reality. That's fine when it's someone healthy. But people can get in to an echo chamber of negativity and need help getting back out. When someone might get raped, deviant thoughts are a bigger problem. It's relatively easy to change them.
,
Basically, if you are hiding your thoughts from friends, partners, loved ones, you need to understand you have found a "yellow flag." You aren't technically harming anyone, but you are focused on harming someone. It's not healthy.
,
Again, you shouldn't be punished for having thoughts. But there should be more of a discussion of what thoughts lead to you to a dark place. No one is born a rapist. How come there's so many of them? I think it's because we don't have enough of these types of discussions.
,
Porn that simulates being with a child sexually or portraying a child sexually isn't healthy and is actually illegal in many jurisdictions around the world. The reason being exactly what we're talking about.
`
Lolita being probably the most infamous example, which follows a man who becomes obsessed with a pre-pubescent girl to the point he eventually murders the girl's mother and then kidnaps the girl, who he calls Lolita (Idr her real name).
`
This book is, iirc, is connected by name and in themes to the Loli/Shouta genre from Japan (which features people who either ARE children, or who bear a strong resemblance to and/or the mannerisms of a child). It's also why Epstein's plane was known as the Lolita express
`
There are games such as "Rapeplay"(sp?) In which you play as a man who stalks a mother and her two daughters (one around 15 I think, and the other probably 11 or 12). The game focuses on the man raping each character individually, and then together for the end of it
`
`
Yet most people that consume these... "media" formats (and toys) don't seem to have any actual interest in fucking children or animals in reality.
`
The argument usually seems to be that no real person is actually being harmed.
`
Child sex dolls do seem to have been banned largely, as has the game "Rapleplay" - but to many Lolita is considered a classic of a sort.
`
And then there is media like Cuties in which several dozen underage girls were encouraged to produce provocative videos that are now owned by some adult, to do with in private what they wish. Which become more concerning when you know Sundance is involved and they have a convicted pedophile working there iirc. A select few of those girls were chosen to be turned into pedophile eyecandy.
`
`
I guess my point with all this is that it seems to be a very complicated subject. And there seems to be very little consistency in how or why we choose to ban something when it comes to this. We do seem to be slightly more inclined to ban if it is something that suggests action rather than mere exposure, however