Perverts, paedophiles etc

[Robsk II]

He should be shot imo. I liked his music in his days but I really think he is a waste of space and just a pervert.

 

Not targetting saintwarwick specifically, just using it as an example...

 

Is it only me who really resents the fact that the term 'pervert' has become synonymous with the term 'paedophile'?

 

They are NOT one and the same. Pretty much everyone is a pervert when it comes down to it. If a perversion, in this context, is a sexual act which is considered taboo or outside of social norms, then hey, some people consider blowjobs to be perverted, tying people up to be perverted, etc - and I'm willing to bet an awful lot that 90% of the sexually active board users have dabbled in things they consider to be somewhat deviant, even if it's low level stuff like furry handcuffs or silk cords round wrists. Hey, a lot of men seem to love the thought of lesbians, or anal, etc etc, and these are perverted things by puritanical standards. So please consider your own proclivities before chucking those who liked a bit of mild s&m in their own home, etc etc, in with the likes of Glitter et al. Predatory sexual practices of these kinds go far beyond a perversion.

 

Also - what's with the moral-panic ********? I, and most leading experts in the area, consider paedophilia to be basically a mental health issue, something in the chemical and psychological make up of a persons sexuality that has basically gone wrong. Clearly, sometimes society needs to be protected from the more predatory types of people - those with sexual perversions that impact negatively on others. But most of the time, people need help, not shooting. Lock them up if they are a risk, by all means - do what is needed to safeguard the well-being of society. But if we shot everyone with mental health issues, which they can no more help having than a spinal injury related wheelchair user can get up and run around, then we are in a dangerous place and something very uncivilised and unfair. It's ignorance and fear culture that leads to these over zealous, over dramatic reactions. Clearly, no-one wants their children or families or anyone they care about to be impacted on, abused etc, by others. Baying for blood has never helped anyone. Don't say 'what if it happened to you' - of course I'd be outraged. But the fact of the matter is that ridiculous hype based reactions are indicative of no consideration or intellect used to reach a conclusion, and our society should be able to do rather better than that.

[saintkiptanui]

I am a pervert.

[Dicko]

Yep, agreed.

 

GG is a sick bastard, not a pervert.

I take my perversions seriously and am proud of them

[Weston Super Saint]

If I honestly thought people like GG would change, I would agree with you.

 

Unfortunately I think saintwarwick is right. If something is wrong with the chemical / psychological balance of such people perhaps we are better off dealing with them, so that this chemical imbalance - and I assume you are alluding towards genetics here - is not allowed to continue...

 

I agree pervert is usually used in the wrong context though.

Edited 29 August, 2008 by Weston Super Saint

[Robsk II]

It's just lazy thinking and lazy language. It's one of those words which we still use as a kind of gut-reaction to something we are uncomfortable with, maybe built in from the days when we were more.. hmm, fundamentally christian as a society. Not that practices were that different, but certainly less openly accepted.

[Dicko]

It's just lazy thinking and lazy language. It's one of those words which we still use as a kind of gut-reaction to something we are uncomfortable with, maybe built in from the days when we were more.. hmm, fundamentally christian as a society. Not that practices were that different, but certainly less openly accepted.

 

You make that sound as if paedophilia is just a taboo subject, rather than being wrong

[Robsk II]

If I honestly thought people like GG would change, I would agree with you.

 

Unfortunately I think saintwarwick is right. If something is wrong with the chemical / psychological balance of such people perhaps we are better off dealing with them, so that this chemical imbalance - and I assume you are alluding towards genetics here - is not allowed to continue...

 

I'm not talking genetics actually, I mean chemical levels in the brain and so on. It's not as if we are going to kill those poor Fritzl kids and grandkids just because daddy / grandaddy was a grand old hardcore deviant. I would say these things are a result primarily of conditioning. Many serial killers have some similar past experiences etc, for example.

 

I just think killing them is not a right a society that holds itself up as fair and just etc should have. If these people can't help it, which I truly believe is often the case - how can we kill them? Who deserves to die? It's just not a call we should rashly make. Plus - do you think we should also euthanise all those with other mental health issues, from schizophrenia to simple depression? Should we kill those with genetic health problems, or those more prone to them? In it's purest sense, this could be seen as benefitting society in the long term - but human society has perhaps always been strongest because of its desire to survive as a whole, to cure and preserve. Most dog owners know that mongrels are often the healthiest breed precisely because they have a mix of genetic material. Mix a red setter with a labrador and the chances of it developing epilepsy (almost all red setters do) drops.

 

Even if we cannot "cure" some people, I still believe we made an important progressive step in abolishing capital punishment. I don't think anyone has a right to kill anyone, simple as that, and I'd be less comfortable if we still did in this country. If it means locking people up and getting them to earn their keep for the rest of their lives in a commune, so be it. We have always spent money on curing people and palliative care for those who cannot be cured, and as our understanding of mental health increases, so should the way we treat it develop. If someone can't help something, no matter what it is, it's perhaps more worthy a cause than spending it on health issues people could avoid, like smoking related stuff. Even then, some of these things like obesity and alcoholism - they, too, should be treated with a joined up approach, understanding that sometimes these people do need proactive treatment for their mental health as well as reactive treatment to their physical problems.

[Robsk II]

You make that sound as if paedophilia is just a taboo subject, rather than being wrong

 

No - I'm talking specifically about the term perversion rather than paedophilia. Whilst paedophilia is a perversion, it's an one that is unaccceptable if put into practice.

 

Another point - If you think about it, it seems likely that 'proper paedophiles' only become such when they A) have that kind of desire and B) lack the social education or mental health to effectively restrict their actions.

 

Many people have dark dreams, I suspect, or feelings they are not comfortable with, whether thats people who have violent fantasies or whatever else. I honestly suspect that for every paedo in the paper, there are several other people who harbour some of the same desires in their core but are within societal norms and thus never act on them. I would also add that it is not these people we should usually be conerned about - it's the ones who are also psychopathic or sociopathic, and don't have the same capacity to quash those things.

[Weston Super Saint]

I'm not talking genetics actually, I mean chemical levels in the brain and so on. It's not as if we are going to kill those poor Fritzl kids and grandkids just because daddy / grandaddy was a grand old hardcore deviant. I would say these things are a result primarily of conditioning. Many serial killers have some similar past experiences etc, for example.

 

I just think killing them is not a right a society that holds itself up as fair and just etc should have. If these people can't help it, which I truly believe is often the case - how can we kill them? Who deserves to die? It's just not a call we should rashly make. Plus - do you think we should also euthanise all those with other mental health issues, from schizophrenia to simple depression? Should we kill those with genetic health problems, or those more prone to them? In it's purest sense, this could be seen as benefitting society in the long term - but human society has perhaps always been strongest because of its desire to survive as a whole, to cure and preserve. Most dog owners know that mongrels are often the healthiest breed precisely because they have a mix of genetic material. Mix a red setter with a labrador and the chances of it developing epilepsy (almost all red setters do) drops.

 

Even if we cannot "cure" some people, I still believe we made an important progressive step in abolishing capital punishment. I don't think anyone has a right to kill anyone, simple as that, and I'd be less comfortable if we still did in this country. If it means locking people up and getting them to earn their keep for the rest of their lives in a commune, so be it. We have always spent money on curing people and palliative care for those who cannot be cured, and as our understanding of mental health increases, so should the way we treat it develop. If someone can't help something, no matter what it is, it's perhaps more worthy a cause than spending it on health issues people could avoid, like smoking related stuff. Even then, some of these things like obesity and alcoholism - they, too, should be treated with a joined up approach, understanding that sometimes these people do need proactive treatment for their mental health as well as reactive treatment to their physical problems.

 

There are other ways to stop the 'genetical' lines from continuing other than killing people...

 

Sterilisation would be a relatively simple answer - but maybe selective genetics is too "early 21st century Germany" :smt102

[saintkiptanui]

I once dreamt that I married my fat friend, that was and still is my darkest dream, the next morning I woke up and thought it was real.

[Gemmel]

Also - what's with the moral-panic ********? I, and most leading experts in the area, consider paedophilia to be basically a mental health issue, something in the chemical and psychological make up of a persons sexuality that has basically gone wrong. Clearly, sometimes society needs to be protected from the more predatory types of people - those with sexual perversions that impact negatively on others. But most of the time, people need help, not shooting. Lock them up if they are a risk, by all means - do what is needed to safeguard the well-being of society. But if we shot everyone with mental health issues, which they can no more help having than a spinal injury related wheelchair user can get up and run around, then we are in a dangerous place and something very uncivilised and unfair. It's ignorance and fear culture that leads to these over zealous, over dramatic reactions. Clearly, no-one wants their children or families or anyone they care about to be impacted on, abused etc, by others. Baying for blood has never helped anyone. Don't say 'what if it happened to you' - of course I'd be outraged. But the fact of the matter is that ridiculous hype based reactions are indicative of no consideration or intellect used to reach a conclusion, and our society should be able to do rather better than that.

 

I couldn't disagree more. Even if we agreed that at its basic level it is a mental illness, that doesn't provide the sicko's the right to act on those thoughts. They are fully aware of the damage they inflict on their victims lives, but put their gratification above the lives of young children.

 

So i'm all for hyped up reactions and it will only be a matter of time before Glitter gets some proper justice from the public.

 

If they are ill.........treat them - castration

[Robsk II]

Gemmel - I never said it gives them the right. If you read the bit above, I'd say that people only act on them if they are also sociopathic or psychopathic - as you put it, simply not caring about the impact on others and placing their gratification above all else. I am not in any way, whatsoever, condoning or accepting the actions.

[Thedelldays]

Robsk II, you are still oh so very DULL

[Robsk II]

Delldays, you f*cking thick idiot, if you don't like what I post, **** off and have a w*nk over naval shelling or killing civilians or something. This is an entirely valid topic for discussion in the lounge, but you, true to type, feel the need to be a tedious, purile, intellect challenged c*ck. No-one else has felt the need to come on and abuse people, instead people have done what they are meant to do in the Lounge. You're a pretty ****-poor advert for the armed services mate.

 

Words too long? Sorry.

[Dicko]

You're getting into very deep, psychological waters now Robsk!

 

I remember seeing an article on the BBC about the film 'The Accused'

Everytime they showed the full, un-cut version on BBC2, the viewing figures rose dramatically in the final 20 minutes.

Obviously, this is when the rape takes place.

 

Apparantely, a huge amount of us, both male and female, have fantasies about rape

[Jillyanne]

You're getting into very deep, psychological waters now Robsk!

 

I remember seeing an article on the BBC about the film 'The Accused'

Everytime they showed the full, un-cut version on BBC2, the viewing figures rose dramatically in the final 20 minutes.

Obviously, this is when the rape takes place.

 

Apparantely, a huge amount of us, both male and female, have fantasies about rape

 

I also agree with what RobskII is saying, I also consider myself to be a pervert.

[Robsk II]

Excellent point Dicko. It's natural to be curious etc about some odd things, thus why people look at accidents etc, even. None of us condone rape so why does this occur? I know women who fantasise about rape, more than one. Yet clearly, the practice is not acceptable in any way. Should we euthanise those who fantasise about it? Are we to assume all these people will then go out and do it? Of course not. It is, again, those who have other issues who will enact their fantasies, not caring about the harm they cause.

[Essruu]

I, and most leading experts in the area, consider paedophilia to be basically a mental health issue, something in the chemical and psychological make up of a persons sexuality that has basically gone wrong.

 

This is exactly the same as homosexuals imo and why they should all be castrated.

[Robsk II]

Great contribution Essruu.

[Weston Super Saint]

Excellent point Dicko. It's natural to be curious etc about some odd things, thus why people look at accidents etc, even. None of us condone rape so why does this occur? I know women who fantasise about rape, more than one. Yet clearly, the practice is not acceptable in any way. Should we euthanise those who fantasise about it? Are we to assume all these people will then go out and do it? Of course not. It is, again, those who have other issues who will enact their fantasies, not caring about the harm they cause.

 

We should certainly do something more with the people that do go out and do it....

 

Fantasies are on thing. Putting them into practice is an entirely different ball game....

[Thedelldays]

Delldays, you f*cking thick idiot, if you don't like what I post, **** off and have a w*nk over naval shelling or killing civilians or something. This is an entirely valid topic for discussion in the lounge, but you, true to type, feel the need to be a tedious, purile, intellect challenged c*ck. No-one else has felt the need to come on and abuse people, instead people have done what they are meant to do in the Lounge. You're a pretty ****-poor advert for the armed services mate.

 

Words too long? Sorry.

wow.......deep, powerful stuff.

[Guest Dark Sotonic Mills]

This is exactly the same as homosexuals imo and why they should all be castrated.

 

If you didn't drive a cab, you'd have to drive a white van.

 

Sun reader by any chance as well?

[Thedelldays]

we should do more with all hardcore criminals IMO...why single out paedos????

[Robsk II]

wow.......deep, powerful stuff.

 

Ironically, that small polemic is probably more complex and advanced in linguistic terms than anything you will ever manage with such a limited intellect.

[Thedelldays]

Ironically, that small polemic is probably more complex and advanced in linguistic terms than anything you will ever manage with such a limited intellect.

you have no idea who I am, what I do or what level of education I have..

 

just because i dont put commas in the right place or be arsed to type a few words correctly on an internet message board, does not mean i am beyond your intellect..

 

[Patrick Bateman]

Not targetting saintwarwick specifically, just using it as an example...

 

Is it only me who really resents the fact that the term 'pervert' has become synonymous with the term 'paedophile'?

 

They are NOT one and the same.

 

Totally agree ... perverted and proud!

[Robsk II]

Bateman, agreed.

 

does not mean i am beyond your intellect..

 

No, but let's be honest, you probably are. Your insistence on acting like a moron 99% of the time seems to corroborate any suspicions I may have. Instead of engaging with a perfectly valid conversation, putting in well constructed and reasoned arguments, you instead chose to come on and be abusive and immature. Who are you trying to impress? If you choose to act like a c*ck, expect to be judged as such.

[Baj]

please keep this on topic and insult free, else the infraction-fairy will make a visit...

(and before you ask, yes, DSM is the infraction fairy)

[Guest Dark Sotonic Mills]

please keep this on topic and insult free, else the infraction-fairy will make a visit...

(and before you ask, yes, DSM is the infraction fairy)

 

Do you think you could choose you words a little more carefully, Mr J?

[Thedelldays]

Bateman, agreed.

 

 

 

No, but let's be honest, you probably are. Your insistence on acting like a moron 99% of the time seems to corroborate any suspicions I may have. Instead of engaging with a perfectly valid conversation, putting in well constructed and reasoned arguments, you instead chose to come on and be abusive and immature. Who are you trying to impress? If you choose to act like a c*ck, expect to be judged as such.

I have engaged...I asked why single out perverts, sorry, kiddle fiddlers for "special treatment"...there is a case that they are mentally ill, is it morally correct to throw the book at them? why not help them sure their illness like we do in other walks of life..

 

If we are to do anything about anyone, lets be harder on more hardcore, re-offending criminals and not have the "fluffy" justice system we have that allows people to preach hate against the very country that gives them a roof over their heads and free money, live here and in some cases, not answer for their actions....

[Gemmel]

Gemmel - I never said it gives them the right. If you read the bit above, I'd say that people only act on them if they are also sociopathic or psychopathic - as you put it, simply not caring about the impact on others and placing their gratification above all else. I am not in any way, whatsoever, condoning or accepting the actions.

 

I wasn't suggesting you were, but (IMHO) adding another "pathic" condition onto their padeo status, seems to lessen their accountabillity for the personal decsions they take that ruin lives.

 

I really dont understand why we don't castrate all offenders. I see that you can request a chemical one, but why aren't we forcing this on all proven offenders?

[Robsk II]

delldays, your points of view are valid - I just don't know why you need to come on an call me dull immediately.

 

For what it's worth, I do think that if we go down the 'punishment' route, then it should indeed be a punishment. As it happens, I'm sort of vague about whether it really does anyone much good, but that's a different issue.

[Thedelldays]

I wasn't suggesting you were, but (IMHO) adding another "pathic" condition onto their padeo status, seems to lessen their accountabillity for the personal decsions they take that ruin lives.

 

I really dont understand why we don't castrate all offenders. I see that you can request a chemical one, but why aren't we forcing this on all proven offenders?

why not hang all murderers then?

[Weston Super Saint]

why not hang all murderers then?

 

Sounds good.

 

That or the chair.

[Jillyanne]

why not hang all murderers then?

 

Well it might cause problems if years later someone else was proved to have committed said murder.

[Guest Dark Sotonic Mills]

I wasn't suggesting you were, but (IMHO) adding another "pathetic" condition onto their padeo status, seems to lessen their accountability for the personal decisions they take that ruin lives.

 

I really don't understand why we don't castrate all offenders. I see that you can request a chemical one, but why aren't we forcing this on all proven offenders?

 

I think that Rob's point is that there is no decision making here, just an action taken on impulse.

 

However, those who are cognisant enough about their actions and still choose their path have gone beyond mentally ill and into the realms of pure criminals. All in my opinion, of course.

[Robsk II]

I wasn't suggesting you were, but (IMHO) adding another "pathic" condition onto their padeo status, seems to lessen their accountabillity for the personal decsions they take that ruin lives.

 

I really dont understand why we don't castrate all offenders. I see that you can request a chemical one, but why aren't we forcing this on all proven offenders?

 

All I'm saying is that I think the offending takes place due to a variety of factors. Their accountability is never really brought into question by me - only the reasons for their behaviours. Clearly, they are accountable. I'm not making excuses, only explanations, if that makes sense. Offenders are accountable. Ultimately, even if someone has had an awful life and ends up offending because of their background - which really can happen, no matter how lame it seems - then by a certain age, it becomes sort of irrelevent. There might be reasons, but it is always up to them to make the right choice. The issue in this case is that some people seem - for these reasons - to make the wrong ones, and seem not to realise why that's a problem! So the work that needs doing is on their empathy and understanding of social behaviour etc, so that they do adequately understand why it's bad.

 

As for castration, I think that a justice system that allows for appeals and so on, and evidence based stuff, shouldn't kill or chop balls off because there is often an element of doubt. It's important to our concept of justice. You can't be too draconian because there is no appeal, which is a fundamental right. Also, I don't think there is much evidence to say criminal behaviour is a genetic thing, to be honest, and some people might literally end up inside through some poor choices rather than some 'evil' ones.

[Saint Mikey]

I once dreamt that I married my fat friend, that was and still is my darkest dream, the next morning I woke up and thought it was real.

 

You're the one for me, fatty

You're the one I really, really love

And i will stay

Promise you'll say

If I'm in your way

You're the one for me, fatty

You're the one I really, really love

And I will stay

Promise you'll say

If I'm ever in your ...

A-hey

 

All over battersea

Some hope; and some despair

All over battersea

Some hope; and some despair

Oh ...

 

You're the one for me, fatty

You're the one I really, really love

And I will stay

Promise you'll say

If I'm in your way

You're the one for me, fatty

You're the one I really, really love

And I will stay

Promise you'll say

If I'm ever in your ...

A-hey

 

All over battersea

Some hope; and some despair

All over battersea

Some hope; and some despair

Oh, oh ...

 

You're the one for me, fatty

You're the one i really, really love

And i will stay

Promise you'll say

If i'm ever in your way

A-hey

 

You're the one for me, fatty

You're the one for me, a-hey-hey

A-hey

A-hey

A-hey

A-he-he-he-hey

[Thedelldays]

Well it might cause problems if years later someone else was proved to have committed said murder.

even beyond all reasonable doubt...say, harold shipman, ian huntley, moyra hindley, iain brady and the like?

 

why keep such inhumain being alive...WHY?....dont single out peados just as they prey on children, as they are not the only ones...

 

as a nation, we are too soft of criminal justice altogether....I am no expert but that is my opinion.

[Robsk II]

Delldays - Clearly there are some who are pretty much undoubted. But that element of doubt must be fair across cases, that's what justice is. It's hard to make a case in their defence, of course. Same with people like Hitler - how can you say they deserve to live? Well, perhaps they don't. perhaps if anyone deserves death, they do. I'm just not comfortable with our society playing god, I guess, or lowering ourselves to the level of murderers etc. Perhaps them being kept alive and being made aware of the pain they've caused is a more worthy punishment anyway? It's not an easy issue, as yes, taxpayer money keeps them alive. As it happens, I think they should have to work in prison, but there we go.

[St Landrew]

Yep, agreed.

 

GG is a sick bastard, not a pervert.

I take my perversions seriously and am proud of them

 

Completely agree with Robsk II on this. GG isn't even a sick bastard. He's neither physically unwell [although his heart may be a bit dodgy] and he is not illegitimate as far as I know.

 

He's a paedophile, and that is unacceptable in our society. Sorry if that's dull too.

[Hatch]

Capital Punishment does take place in our society.

 

We shoot Taliban every day.

[norwaysaint]

Capital Punishment does take place in our society.

 

We shoot Taliban every day.

 

Being a taliban is a mental illness and we should be working to help these perverts, not shooting them.

[Robsk II]

Hear hear.

[South City Si]

I agree with Robsk. This is beyond criminality and shouldn't be treated as such. It is a sociopathetic mental illness. They should be put in secure mental health clinic if they have gone out/seeked out children.

Murder is a different matter, unless again the are serial killers, then again should be in mental health facility.

These mental illness need to be studying and understood for the future determent and prevention of these actions.

I'm sure even with 'chemical' or physical castration may not stop them harming people or 'cure' them. We find why and how to stop them harming and just stop them without deliving further.

[norwaysaint]

The big problem with paedophilia is it's a condition that can never be cured or realistically controlled. So how to deal with them long term?

[Jillyanne]

RobskII - why do you think it took GG until late in his life to commit these crimes?

[St Landrew]

The big problem with paedophilia is it's a condition that can never be cured or realistically controlled. So how to deal with them long term?

 

I'm not a fan of electronic tagging of people who have served their punishment, but paedophilia could be a condition where it may be desirable for the protection of children. It doesn't limit the wearer's ability to travel, but it does mean they know they are being monitored. In a sense, it is for their own well-being too.

[Hatch]

I'm sure even with 'chemical' or physical castration may not stop them harming people or 'cure' them.

 

 

It may not stop them, but I bet it deters others.

[Robsk II]

Saying that Hatch - deterrents haven't proved to be that succesful in many countries. The US is the prime example of this.

 

Norwaysaint - if need be, to deal with it - have an ongoing process of rehabilitation based aims, with continual evaluation. If they never manage to convince that they are able to control themselves, then hey, keep them locked indefinitely in a situation that is as reasonable as possible - ie away from their potential victims, but with some human rights as much as possible, but also having to work. Again, some form of secure unit commune. If they do come out, then yes, for everyone's benefit, strict monitoring of movements at the very least. Not an easy thing to find a perfect solution.

 

Jill - hard to say. Maybe he always harboured these feelings, maybe he has in fact offended previously. Perhaps he only behaves this way now because for whatever reason he has lost the ability to make socially appropriate choices. Maybe it's a psychological manifestation of him tryng to hold onto his younger days of groupies and so on, who can say?