We feel true human pity and compassion for Frankenstein’s monster, as the baying mob with flaming torches throng around. Yet we create our own monsters of human beings who, for whatever reason, have psychological problems or disorders which result in sexual preferences, outside the acceptable norms.
Let me be quite clear, I would never condone the actions of active paedophiles. No child should have to suffer sexual abuse. It is an abomination.
Yet if we do not try to understand what leads to the crime, how can we hope to treat the perpetrators, short of burning them in their houses?
There is a wide range of sexual preference encapsulated in the paedophile. From, at one extreme, those who are sexually aroused by babies and toddlers, surely unthinkable to 99.99% of society, to the guy who has always harboured a bit of a schoolgirl fetish, and eyes up sixth formers in uniform. I think that almost all will find the former extremely distasteful and abhorrent, perhaps though there are more than a few male readers who are shifting uncomfortably in their seats regarding the latter.
Woody Allen, Gary Glitter, Lewis Carroll, J.M. Barrie, Adolph Hitler, all allegedly paedophiles. All of these very divergent in sexual preferences, yet similar in that they seem all to have been attracted to children of various ages.
The age of the internet has made child pornography available to paedophiles worldwide. Like all pornography, it is a drug which damages the viewer; he needs a stronger and stronger fix. Has the internet given an escape valve to users who would otherwise have resorted to actual abuse of children? Has it increased abuse by creating a market for child abuse pictures and films? This short article does not purport to be an academic examination of the subject, I am not qualified, nor would I wish to do that research. I therefore cannot provide even a hint at the answers.
We cannot ignore the fact that the paedophile is a human being. Not “the scum of the Earth” – I’ve always found that particular phrase unacceptable, but someone with a disorder of the mind. We must find ways to identify and help these unfortunate individuals whilst simultaneously protecting our children. Burning torches will not do it.
I wonder if those at the forefront of the mob, with the evil intent etched upon their faces, wish to burn out the demon which they know resides somewhere deep within themselves.
Oli (14/11/06) |
Answer these questions
Written by Josie (2728 comments posted) 14th November 2006 | | How do people know what is right from wrong in this life any more? How do people separate evil from good? How can you not be led into temptation if you see others around you doing certain things all the time which, to your eyes, seems acceptable to everyone else? I would venture an answer, but I would like to hear what others say. |
Written by Phil (6635 comments posted) 14th November 2006 | Perhaps a slightly off topic answer.
I want to live in a civilised society. For the most part I do - but there are elements within society with whom I despair. I don't believe in the death penalty - barbaric, so I certainly don't believe in burning any one in their houses. I want to live in a civilised society that protects its children - I'm a father after all. I don't think there's any more paedophilia going on now than there ever was - it's just more out there in the media etc. I hate knee jerk reactions to this. Do you remember the fellow that was beaten to death (in Darlington I think) a couple of years ago because the local scum thought he was a pervert? They were wrong. Just another human being following his little life, doing his little thing, in the wrong place, at the wrong time.
I agree that a cause and a solution has to be found. Locking up the perverts for ever would be one answer, but it's something this country seems unwilling to do. Yes, it's probably an illness, perhaps it's untreatable, perhaps it is - I'm not qualified to say.
On a side issue, and this is not offered in any way as an excuse, the day to day sexualisation of children can not help. It's everywhere you look. To someone of a less than normal outlook, this must be very confusing.
I have more to say on this I think, but I'll have to think about it first.
Thanks Oli,
All the best,
Phil.
|
Written by ellipinnock (1753 comments posted) 14th November 2006 | A difficult path to tread between protecting vulnerable children from terrible harm and avoiding the dehumanisation of anyone suspected of paedophilia and a problem I'm sure there is no easy answer to.
The trouble is divorcing intellect and emotion, yes the intellect says that these individuals are human and potentially seriously mentally ill but within the mob merely feels abhorrence and repulsion. Not an issue I feel up to tackling.
Elli | Twaddle
Written by johniebg (538 comments posted) 15th November 2006 | Badly concieved, considered and constructed. You litter this with so much rubbish it just has no merit or foundations, despite having one salient point. I have not read any of the proceeding comments but guess there will be good support from church mice and humanists alike.
I was 15 when I first started viewing girls through sexual eyes, some 14 year old girls took them and any pretty thing over that age upto that owned by mother.
Just because I grew up does not mean the hormones that course through my veins are different or aligned through age. I now do not look upon such specimens with different eyes. It is instead my own sense of morality and respect for other humans through all ages that determine my propriety.
As for your diatribe about porn, I can only assume you speak from your own personal experience, if not how else did you come to the conclusion that it spirals you to ever increasing needs? A good book? I readily admit to viewing porn, have done for a good number of years, my tastes change but all my traits detailed above do not for one minute allow me to consider that 'all birds want it' just because I saw a pair of fuck me shoes bookended by two geezers on a sofa!
The view that porn equals exploitation is outdated and ill founded. Exploitation exists within mankind; porn, prostitution, working, living, the home, emotions. Disagree? then ask yourself what resulted in the emergence of unions, rights movements including womens, look around this world, exploition of man by mankind is everywhere.
You make one good point, it is how we view each other that counts, even those considered the lowest. Your essay does not in anyway set out a plausible base for discussion.
| You are entitled to your opinion;
Written by Talisker (1320 comments posted) 15th November 2006 | So paedophiles to you Johniebg are just the same as "you or me" but without moral propriety or respect for others, complete hokum. You fail to address the issue of those attracted to pre-pubescent children, why? You also fail to accept what psychiatry has long held, that paedophilia is a psychological disorder. Treatable and manageable (with sufficient resources) like schizophrenia, or manic depression.
Your porn habits are your business, I have heard and read enough expert debate on the subject to believe what I wrote. By expert I mean professionals who deal with sex offenders, psychiatrists, psychologists and porn users themselves.
I didn't say that porn was exploitation. Though if children are involved I would suggest it is.
I don't think you read the article at all. Your critique is of another piece, by another writer. What an astonishing phenomena!
Oli
 |
Written by Phil (6635 comments posted) 15th November 2006 | Still thinking Oli. You say this is treatable. I've never heard that before. I hope you're right, but how would you know if someone was 'cured and 'safe.'
I did write things about wanting to live in a civilised society- but a bit of introspection tells me I would want to commit murder if any of this was visited upon my children.
Still more to add. PMed.
All the best,
Phil. | Definately your essay ...
Written by johniebg (538 comments posted) 16th November 2006 | I have cut and paste the primary comments from your essay that had my fingers leaping for keyboard, just in case your unsure about whose essay I was in fact reading.
to the guy who has always harboured a bit of a schoolgirl fetish, and eyes up sixth formers in uniform. I think that almost all will find the former extremely distasteful and abhorrent, perhaps though there are more than a few male readers who are shifting uncomfortably in their seats regarding the latter.
Working on the premise that sixth formers are aged between 16 and 17 and legally capable of procreating, this statement is irresponsible and incomprehensibly narrow minded. In the main hetrosexual males are designed to breed and thus find the female form attractive. No male should feel guilt for merely looking and letting the mind stray
The age of the internet has made child pornography available to paedophiles worldwide. Like all pornography, it is a drug which damages the viewer; he needs a stronger and stronger fix.
You infer that pornography damages those that view it. I was at a total lose at this so concluded you could only mean porn viewers are exploiting by proxy and are thus damaged or are likely to rush out and commit some sexual crime. You infer that ultimately the stronger fix means they will cross legal boundaries.
Are you saying people that watch porn will ultimately become paedophiles? I would love to see your answer to that one in context to your statement, in print.
Your essay raises the valid point of how we deal with mankinds damaged and preaches constraint towards such people. Almost without pausing you then feed the uninformed mind with fuel and justification for the sort of aberrations you denounce. Damaged bodies and minds have existed as part of the homo sapien genetic construct as far as has been recorded. Neither you or I are qualified to determine how that is best approached when those that are touted as knowing seem at a complete loss.
This essay makes you sound like one of these post christians types that now place humanity as mankinds delimiter in place of a god, but equally narrow on the moral front. Someone that believes humanity stands above all else and can salve all mankinds ills, social and medical. We are ultimately products of nature and are limited as such, to fix what is wrong with mankind is to strip the animal from our minds and that will require another step in evolution. | The spelling is "Definitely"
Written by Talisker (1320 comments posted) 16th November 2006 | However, your rant is as full of miscomprehension as it is full of illiteracy.
When you deal in inferences, you must be careful. You can spot inferences which don't exist outside the your own mind.
I will leave it to the readers to decide whose approach is more logical and balanced.
Oli
 |
Written by Phil (6635 comments posted) 16th November 2006 | Last comment from me on this.
Typically off topic.
Johnie, your own reviews seem just as full of 'expert' opinion and inference as you accuse Oli of. It leaves me a little bewildered. To use the same methods you seem to be trashing does seem somewhat odd. Incidentally - I thought the article was well balanced. Some searching around for truths - but honest and open. Isn't that what being human is all about?
Phil. |
Only registered users can rate and write comments.
Please login or register. Powered by AkoComment 2.0! |
Previous item
