|
|
 |
|
Getting Real : Speak your peace
Odd-Ed: On pedophilia: At risk of alienation... | from Oddman - Wednesday, April 18, 2007
accessed 5278 times Preface: I want you to know beforehand, that some words and views in this article may be controversial, contentious, offending, or traumatic to second generation ex-TFs. If you feel discussing pedophilia and it's manifestations may be traumatic or offending to you, please know that you are by no means being forced to read the remainder of this article. These are my views as of when I post this, and my views are always subject to change. 
[Odd-Ed] Promoting freedom of speech, thought and expression
~ On pedophilia: At risk of alienating myself... ~
Written and edited by Oddman
Pedophilia, why am I even reflecting on this subject? Why even bring this up? Well, for one, it's taboo. I enjoy controversy, I appreciate critique, I thrive on discord, and I feast on dispute. I aim to push the boundaries on what can and what cannot be discussed. And secondly, I personally had to give this thought, very recently. Why? Well, I had sex with a minor. Gosh, cringe, ew, gross, perverse. Well, there's the cat out of the bag. Now, while you all go git yer Remington double barrels, let me tell you a story.
____________
Recently, I had to sit for my ex who tried to OD. She has two little girls, 3 and 4 years old. It's been a long time since I've had to babysit, so I do this as carefully as I can. I cook, I wash, I take them to Kindergarten, I clean the house. Well, now I'm frusterated and I've got a few hours to kill. So I head out, walk in a corner store, and start flipping through a UFC magazine. A short while later, a few young chicks walk in, and park their asses in front of the magazine shelf. I do what I do, check them out, size them up. All of them look Brazilian, young but doable. I'm guessing uni students, since they aren't dressed in school uniforms or teen gear, besides, high school classes would still be in session. They thumb through Vogue and Elle, and one is carrying a six-pack. She reaches to grab the one copy of a woman's Qawaii magazine, and I make my move. I snatch the magazine and tuck it under my arm, and continue to stare at pictures of sweaty semi-nude men hugging in missionary style, doggy style, and 69 in the sacred octagon. This chick obviously knows the game. No spring cherries here, as she twists the magazine from under my arm, glances at my magazine, and asks me if I'm gay. Would she need me to prove my straightness? Oh, nice try but no? Well then gimme back that ladies magazine I'm buying it, and I had it first. Oops, it tore. I'll have to make it up to you, won't I? Tea for two?
So we have tea, and she invites me to her party tonight. I collect the kids, feed the kids, and put them and ex to sleep. I party with my new friend, her brother, and their posse. We hit up some unknown poison, and before long, the parties off to neverland, with the exception of her and I. We knew what we came for, and dope induced sleep wasn't it. Long story short, me and baby do it like discovery channel in her brother's house. Next morning, I creep out of bed, hoping her brother is still passed out, and realize she's not in bed with me. Smart of her. Then it happens, ala Irvin Welsh, ala Renton, ala Trainspotting. In she walks, looking beautiful, all decked up, considerably younger.... and ready for school...?! I choke on my saliva as I note the high school jersey and pleated skirt. At the breakfast table I meet a very young girl, who tells me she's in her first year of highschool. First year? 16, 15? I spend the next 12 minutes trying to swallow the same one bite of toast, before "suddenly remembering" I had to be somewhere, walking out, and deleting her number.
____________
So there it is. Hang me if you will. Throw stones. Put a bag over my head and shoot me in the back. I'd done what I'd detested. But the more I thought about it, the less guilty I feel. I'm not a pedophile, and what I did was no predatory act. The laws allow for cases where the adult party to an act cannot reasonably have known the age of the underage party. I think meeting out of school during school hours on a school day, being then invited to a party and served alcohol, then invited to spend the night at a residence separate from parents, didn't provide me with enough material from which one could reasonably deduce the age 15/16 years old.
Strictly speaking, the term pedophile as a medical classification, refers to the paraphilia in which an adult has "over a period of six months, recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges or behaviors involving sexually activity with a prepubescent child or children". I spent a day with two adorable prepubertal children. Adorable little girls. I felt nothing. Zilch. I drove them to kindergarten, personally handed them over to their teacher. I brought them back, fed them, played horse, bathed them, dressed them, put them in bed, sat on the bed and read them a book till they slept. Nada. Zilch. Not an iota of sexual attraction whatsoever. I then screwed a 15 or 16 year old girl, not a virgin, and clearly past puberty. On discovering her age, I felt awkward about it.
Quite honestly, I don't feel sexual attraction for anything I, through outward appearance or conversation, consider to be more of a girl than a woman. No boobs, not interested. No ass, never mind. Teen girl talk, that's what your mother is for. On the other hand, I am apparantly attracted to very underage girls, if they have the qualities I look for in a woman. Yep, I said it. Void of information or knowledge of my target's age, I DO feel sexually attracted to any female that fits my criteria for "sexually attractive woman", regardless of what their age is.
____________
Now, I doubt many would defend the criminal manifestations of pedophilia. But what of platonic love for a child? What of pedophilic attractions that are manifested in a platonic manner? Is pedophilia a mental malady? Is pedophilia a sexual orientation? Should pedophiles be exchanging their views on public websites? This is where I think it gets contentious.
In my opinion, simple attraction or emotional connection, devotion, or affection for another's child, is nothing to raise a brow over, and is in fact I think, a good thing. A child could use a good mentor, especially if already deprived of parental guidance. Romantic attraction to a child, though perhaps initially platonic, is -in my mind- not the product of a healthy mind, and is dangerous in that it may open the door to pedophilic attraction.
I personally think that it is possible for an adult to build an emotional connection, or romantic attraction to a child. I wouldn't call that normal, but I think that it is dangerously possible. Some prepubescent children are wise beyond their years, while many legal adults have an understanding of the world that rivals 6 year olds. I wouldn't be too surprised that one adult would connect with a child on some level inbetween the two. More so, if the child returns the affection, and the adult party has not received the same affection from another adult. Again, I do not consider this kind of attraction normal, and I fail to understand it. I believe in most cases, the adult party is capable of categorizing any feelings as something similar to that of master and apprentice, mentor and protege, quite early in the relationship, thus preventing it from culminating in something derogatory to the child.
____________
Pedophilic attraction is to me, unthinkable. I do not accept that pedophilia is a sexual orientation akin to homosexuality, bisexuality, or asexuality. I consider pedophilia to be a paraphilia akin to zoophilia ,necrophilia, or sadomasochism. I believe it's unnatural and abnormal to feel sexual urges for a prepubescent human, with which one cannot correctly copulate. A while ago, I accidently downloaded a retitled clip of prepubescent child porn on a P2P network. This was a 60 second mpg clip (disguised as an MP3 file) of a prepubescent girl happily fellating an erect penis, followed by the man fingering her genitalia. As he does so, the child makes for a split second, a face of bewilderment that I personally recognize as psychological discomfort. I puked. I'm the guy that watches clips of snipers popping insurgents in the head. I'm the guy that reads crime journals, views crime scene footage, and finds Dahmer, Bundy and Manson fascinating. I'm the guy that eats a BLT sandwich, chips and coke, while watching someone being skinned in a horror flick. I'm the guy that bookmarks rotten.com... I puked, deleted the file ctrl-del, and still checked the rubbish bin to be sure. I puked, then I showered, like mad. I felt so ugly and dirty, I felt as if I had been raped myself. I had to physically wash my body, because that image was so revolting and filthy, watching it made me feel violated to the core. I washed and scrubbed every part of my body I could reach. Even videos of beastiality never left me that disgusted. I sat in the shower for a very long time.
Is pedophilia a pathological maladjustment, and is it curable? According to the DSM, it is currently classified as such. I do think that it takes a miswired mind to derive sexual pleasure from the thought or sight of a prepubescent person. On the other hand, I'd be careful about classifying pedophilia as a mental illness. When pedophilia is treated as a mental illness, we leave the door open to release the pedophile, giving him/her the horrific opportunity to repeat their crimes and even escalate the boundaries of their pedophilic activity, at times to the level of murder. It is known that reducing testosterone levels in pedophilic predators reduces their urges. However, the same results can be achieved when reducing testosterone levels in rapists and overly sexually charged individuals. Reducing testosterone levels only serves to reduce sexual drive, and does not change appetite. It does not reduce or change the paraphilia. I am against lobotomies and thalamotomy. I don't think government or law has any business changing what people think, regardless of how horrible and harmful their thoughts may be. Psychotherapy is the other cure often mentioned. However, many pedophilic predators undergo psychotherapy and are evaluated as cured, mentally sound, only to go on to commit their next offense. Pedophilic predators are clearly resistent to psychological interference, and in most cases reparative therapy fails miserably, after consuming many tax dollars. Honestly, as archaic and barbaric, as inhumane as it may sound, if I ran the world, pedophilic predators would be surgically castrated. If the V-tech slaughter had happened at NAMBLA instead, I would be cracking a beer instead of lighting a candle.
____________
But again, some people are pedophiles. Some pedophiles are also predators. Not all pedophiles are predators, and not all predators are pedophiles. In fact, many predators are not pedophiles. Pedophilic attraction in itself and of it's own, does not cause infraction of the law. Further, by focusing solely on pedophilia, we lose sight of the greater pool of molesters and predators. Many criminal acts of pedophilic nature are in fact, not caused by pedophiles, but rather by straight men and women who use defenseless children as a surrogate for what they are unable to achieve, adult sexual interaction. Some predatory acts aimed at children are caused by sadists, who do not particularly care for the age or gender of their subject, but rather are sexually attracted to defenseless people. In such cases, the target does not need to specifically be male or female, adult or child, so long as they are vulnerable and helpless.
In the case of nepiophilia, I think there is little physical sexual element. I believe persons with nepiophilic appetites are deranged persons who desire to destroy, taint, pillage, and defile pure innocence. Their excitement is less that of a sexual nature, but rather, a sadistic one. I think pedophilia certainly shares some of the same properties, but also involves an element of physical sexual attraction to the immature body. Perhaps romantic feelings described by some pedophiles is more of an excuse to themselves, to make their carnal and sadistic appetites seem somehow less vulgar.
To lump all pedophiles as predators, or peg all predatory crimes on pedophiles, is nothing short of paranoid canard, not different from blamming all muggings on blacks, or accusing all homosexuals of pedastry. So where do we draw the line? Is it unacceptable for pedophiles to discuss pedophilia, and why? On this issue, I take an unpopular stance.
I believe there should be a place where pedophiles can discuss amongst themselves, their appetites, their fantasies and urges. Certainly, that place is not here at Movingon. There are no reasons why Movingon should allow even unpredatory passive pedophiles to share their views on this site. But there certainly should be places pedophiles can freely discuss their paraphilia from whatever angle they choose. Now if through some forum, a pedophile attempts to make physical contact with a child, then the alarm bells must ring, authorities must be called, and arrests must be made. I would suggest that such sites should have mandatory age restrictions in much the same way as pornographic sites do. It is the responsibilty of the site host to make it difficult for children to access, and it is the responsibility of parents to protect their children from exposure or contact with such material. However, in much the same way sadomasochism can be freely discussed amongst responsible adults, even pedophilia should be open for discussion to those responsible adults who wish to do so.
____________
I wish to clarify that although I support the individual's freedom to be a pedophile, and the pedophiles freedom to discuss and express his pedophilia, my stance towards the criminal manifestations of nepiophilia, pedophilia, pederasty, and hebephilia remain as they were, in staunch opposition. I personally am not a nepiophile, pedophile, or hebephile. If anything, as a child I was teleiophilic. At age 24, my primary sexual attraction is to women between the age of 19 and 29. Most of my steadies have been 3 to 5 years older than myself.
On the issue of hebephilia, I cannot say 100% that I consider it wrong. After the earlier given real life scenario, I've thought back on it. Would I have still had sex with the girl, if I had known her age before hand? The answer would be a solid no. I simply don't feel any sex is worth going to jail for. But I also don't feel a strong vomit inducing aversion to hebephilia in the way that I do about pedophilia or nepiophilia. Here was a girl, who successfully made me, a person with strong aversion to pedophilia, never see any indication that she was a minor. Of course in the future, I'd have to be more careful. This will hang over my mind, and I'd probably never again just assume. But considering the legal age for marriage in Japan is 16 for females, the law also recognizes that some girls are mature enough to make their own decisions at this age. However, it is my view that not all girls are emotionally mature enough at age 16, although even they themselves may feel so. A wound to the heart is no less a wound than that to the body. If a hebephile or even a non-hebephile decides to date a teenager, I would suggest they abstain from a sexual relationship for at least 6-12 months. If the relationship is carrying on this long, it can be legally deemed a romantic relationship, and it won't be a criminal offense to have consensual sexual interaction. A buffer of the sort would also help prevent a child from giving up her innocence before she knows what it is she truly wants.
I also strongly believe the parents of a 16 year old child should know who the child is dating. They should maintain a close connection with the child, so they are not kept at arms length from their child during the early teenage years. A child should be comfortable speaking to their parents, so if something does go wrong, they'd come to their parents first. In short, I don't encourage hebephilic relationships, and condemn criminal manifestations of hebephilic nature. I do not condemn an attraction to younger women, and consider it more of a preference than illness. However, if one is a pure hebephile, i.e. feels no sexual attraction whatsoever to a woman or man in their late teens and up, I fear that may indicate underlying pedophilic tendencies.
____________
In closing: This article should not be understood to be a pedophile apologetic rant, and in no way condones criminal infractions of law. While I accept that pedophilia does not equate child molester or predator, I consider pedophilia an unhealthy psychological state, and encourage anyone who feels they may have nepiophilic or pedophilic appetites or tendencies, to seek medical evaluation and assistance, and maintain a mutually safe distance from children.
That not withstanding, I've personally come to the conclusion that I would give up a measure of safety in exchange for freedom of speech, thought and expression. I've come to the conlusion that the psychological symptom of pedophilia is in fact independent from the criminal acts of child molestation or child exploitation. They should not be considered one and the same. To consider all predators pedophiles is simplistic, and is counterproductive to profiling and recognizing threats to children. The threat to our children comes from both fixated pedophilic predators, and regressed predators, and we need to be vigilant to all threats, not only that which comes from pedophiles.
____________
This article was written in response to figaros thread http://movingon.org/article.asp?sID=1&Cat=10&ID=4121 . I started writing this piece as a comment, but I was concerned that those who didn't want to read this would be needlessly exposed to it if I posted it in the middle of a thread. I apologize for the lack of reference material on the topic. Resources on this topic are scarce, in particular, neutral and informational ones. Last of all, I apologize for it being so long.
Links and resources.
http://www.answers.com/topic/pedophilia
http://www.mhamic.org
http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/facts_molestation.html
[Odd-Ed] Promoting freedom of speech, thought and expression |
|
|
|
|
Reader's comments on this article Add a new comment on this article |  from com7fy8
Friday, September 21, 2007 - 13:52
(Agree/Disagree?)
hey, oddie . . . I think it can be cured, but this comes with caring about people. not just worrying about yourself and your image. and not USING people. when you care about other people's feelings, this helps to not want things like that. with little kids, they can be very loving, maybe imitate older people's actions, and a pedophile can take this the wrong way...but kids don't have a clue about what the pedophile is feeling or supposing is going on in the kid; so I'd say to a pedophile---don't get into your own make-believing with a kid...find a person your age who can be a real challenge. and find out who each kid really is, instead of just what they look like annd assuuming how they all must be. now, oddie...about picking up someone you don't know...not challenging enough like learning to stay with someone, I think. thanks . . . it was good to meet you; I don't think you did that write-up to start a mess, it was thought out, not lazy for crazy stuff
(reply to this comment)
| from Heraclitus
Tuesday, April 24, 2007 - 20:42
(Agree/Disagree?)
Firstly, I didn’t take the time to read your entire article, in fact I stopped at the part where you choked on toast. If something I say was addressed in the later part of your article, put it down to lethargy.
For starters, what you describe has nothing to do with pedophilia. According to some random dictionary, pedophilia is:
The paraphilia (deviant practice) of being sexually attracted primarily or exclusively to prepubescent children.
Your experience has nothing to do with this, thus it cannot be considered to be pedophilia. I think there is a world of difference in having sexual urges towards a under aged girl because of her finely developed womanly attributes, and having sexual urges towards a child because of their undeveloped attributes. I believe it finally comes down to why you are attracted to her, not her age.
The idea that there is something morally wrong with having sex with someone under “legal” age (I refer to American law) is absurd. While the legitimacy of most laws can be questioned, laws of this sort are particularly questionable. Do right and wrong fluctuate on a state by state basis? How can what’s vile in the US be virtuous in Iceland?
Furthermore, for the majority of western history women were married at 15 or 16 years of age. While I am in no way endorsing this practice, it was a way of life for millennia. The Puritan Anglo states have a rather prudishly selective historical memory.
Enough ranting then.
(reply to this comment)
| from savage
Sunday, April 22, 2007 - 02:38
 (Agree/Disagree?)
I must admit, oddie, that when you first mentioned to me that you had posted such an article, I didn’t know what to think. I questioned your motive…was it purely to vent, was it because you like to push the envelope, was it for attention, or was it because you sincerely enjoy motivating people to view or consider aspects or ideas most would prefer to overlook or tiptoe around?
I thought maybe writing about such a touchy issue and posting it on a site where so many had been traumatized and abused insensitive on your part, but after reading your article, I can see I may have been wrong in my given assumption. It is a thought provoking subject that maybe should be more openly addressed… a topic little has been said on because it is considered taboo and most would deem it to be so obviously black and white in nature… but maybe it isn’t and your article helped me to see that there are certain points, on the subject, I haven’t completely looked at.
So many times what we need to really heal completely or to put something behind us it to go deeper into it… to fully understand it we have to be open to all the sides of it and so often not all sides are going to be viewed the same… good, bad, black, white… life is never this clear cut or simple… I have found most things come in various shades of gray and people are the ones that will determine which color should be added. You will find good along with the bad… you will find some wrongs have a few rights mixed in and vice versa… this is the way things seem to work. There are aspects to this issue worth talking about and it isn’t an easy subject, but usually the hardest things to talk about or say are the things that need saying.
I do agree that there is a difference between a person who makes a dumbass mistake, such as you, odd (no offense) and a predator who goes out looking to be an offender. I think the consequences should fit the intent of the crime and all aspects should be looked at, but then again life isn’t fair and this is why one must be careful and make their choices wisely… this is part of being an adult and living with the consequences of one’s actions.
As for your motive for posting this article… the jury is still out.
(reply to this comment)
|  From Oddman
Tuesday, April 24, 2007, 02:17
(Agree/Disagree?)
My reason for posting this article, is likely a combination of the various reasons you've described. Yes, I do enjoy tackling touchy subjects from different angles, and I do enjoy throwing rocks in the pond to see the ripples. My primary consideration was that this was a topic that did need to be discussed, and hadn't been before. I wanted to hear other's opinions, but hadn't found an appropriate thread. As far as my personal story, I initially wrote it separately, yes, just to vent. When writing this article, I decided to include it. I did consider that some might find this topic distasteful or traumatic. I concluded that one could avoid a posted article, whereas if unposted, those who may benefit, would be deprived of the opportunity to discuss this topic.
My hope is that those with something to say, would do so. My hope is that those who need to approach this issue in order to move on, would do so. My hope is that I personally, would achieve a better understanding of the condition. Not much more, not much less.(reply to this comment) |
| | from steam
Saturday, April 21, 2007 - 17:14
(Agree/Disagree?)
You were extremely reckless in your actions, but the actions do not imply a sick mind. However your paragraph of how much you do enjoy in terms of enjoying watching torture and stuff does give one pause as to your mental health. Also while I can see how you say some site for these people to discuss these tendencies should be legal, I believe it warrants heavy scrutiny of any participant by authorities. They may be discussing fantasies, but illegal ones of abuse against the most defenseless. It is at least as deserving of focus by law enforcement as a neo nazi or islamic fascist site where they discuss fantasies/plans for evil terrorist acts. You cannot arrest them for the discussion necessarily, but you have every right to put them all under survellience and do your best to put them behind bars (without framing them) to protect the innocent. As far as the "poor cop". Someone wrote a sob story about. He may have been an almost innocent victim, but before just taking his word for it I would consider whether you actually read the court transcript and fully found out what the circumstances really were. I do not discount a total misscarraige of justice, it certainly has happened plenty in the past, however there are a lot of guilty (sometimes nice) people out there who can really frame the story differently then it occured. As we have all seen with many family members. When you say "they threw the book at him because he was a cop". I really question it. My observations are that cops usually get away with a lot more then the rest of the population, however it could have been mother/daughter entrapment for some reason. So the story could have happened the way this guy told it.
(reply to this comment)
| From Oddman
Saturday, April 21, 2007, 23:48
(Agree/Disagree?)
I agree, I was rather reckless. I wouldn't say extremely, but reckless nonetheless. I suppose you'd have to experience it to know. Immediately following the knowledge of her age, I felt sick, panicky. But when I stopped and thought about it, I didn't do anything pedophilic at all. If a pedophile had seen this woman, they wouldn't have been attracted to her. She looked woman, acted woman, and was well experienced.
As far as my stomach for gore, I wasn't discussing a fixation for torture, but rather pointing out that few things visually disturb me. If an appreciation for 70's and 80's splatter films is any indication of mental disturbance, then yes, I suppose I'm disturbed that way.
As far as discussing fantasies, there is no such thing as an illegal fantasy. If I was so inclined, I could fantasize about raping, murdering, then cannibalizing 2 year old boys, and there would be nothing illegal about it. Further, I could tell someone about such fantasies, write an essay or story about such fantasies, and make a film about such fantasies, so long as no illegal acts are realized in the course of my such expression. If you want to arrest someone for dangerous thoughts, you'd have to arrest every author of fiction that features a gruesome murder, a rape, an act of violence. I mean, they must have bad dangerous minds and appetites to discuss such things right? So throw Stephen King behind bars. Tarantino'd be his cell mate, along with Robert Rodriguez.
Now, I suppose it would be acceptable for authorities to monitor such sites, so long as only legal methods are employed. However, action can only be taken if a line is crossed. When fantasy takes a step toward realization, i.e. one known to have certain tendencies attempts to make contact with a child, then action must be taken. Prior to that, there is no reason to restrict the expression of ones thoughts, no matter how perverse, dangerous, and deranged they may be. I'd also point out that any attempt to pre-emptively and prematurely restrain or arrest a potential or perceived threat may be counter productive, as they would likely be released anyway, and they may go off the map knowing they are under surveillance. (reply to this comment) |
| | From Thorwald
Sunday, April 22, 2007, 17:32
(Agree/Disagree?)
I suppose many of you are too young to remember "Sharing Schedules". In those days, these schedules were rarely different (in authority) from "JJT schedules". If your name was assigned to a particular "job" you were expected to complete the task (and I purposely use the term "job", as, I _know_ that "sharing"/having sex with a certain individual for some was a "job"; that is, they would not have chosen to have sex with this person had they not been so assigned). It would be easy to imagine that their were preferences. In the case of chores, I certainly had preferences; I would have preferred to mow the lawn than to clean a toilet used by 50 people. Likewise, and a very bad transition, I should think that most adults had their preferences as to who they were going to sleep with on a given night. Now, I must quickly add that a mature adult should have no reasonable excuse to obey an "order" to have sex with a minor, no matter the conditions (similar to how Nazis were not excused from war crimes simply because they were "following orders").
As an example, one of my sister's 12th birthday "presents" was a date with a 30+-year man. He was not assigned to this; he requested it. This, in my opinion, is paedophilia. Had her 12-, 13-, or 14-year old boyfriend requested such an engagement, it would be one thing (although, still illegal in some countries; neither can legally consent, so they are both abusing each other, according to these laws. See the case where a young girl was arrested for abusing herself by taking nude pictures of herself).
However, as with many (maybe most) things in life, there are _no_ absolutes (no matter what Berg had to say on the subject). That is, after carefully studying the subject, I have come to believe that life is full of "grey areas" and moral non-absolutes.
This may be off the subject, but I don't believe in the death penalty, no matter the crime. However, am I violating my own rules on absolutes here? That is, can I say "there is _never_ reason to put someone to death" and, thereby, create an absolute? I believe a good measure of open mindedness is how consistent I am on a given subject. Do I make exceptions for my morals? Do I believe that, under most conditions and situations, a given act is immoral, but can become moral (or the "lesser of two evils")? In making these exceptions, am I being open minded, or am I being inconsistent, or both? I don't believe in Hell, however, if I did, I should believe that Hitler is currently sitting at the table with Satan (maybe sharing a martini; after Satan sadistically dunked him in a lake of fire).
The point is, and getting back to the subject at hand, we can rarely know the full story of a case of abuse. We can, I believe, conclude that adults abusing minors is immoral and should be illegal. However, we must remember that we will always be dealing with grey areas. At its most basic level, even the definition of an "adult" and a "minor" is arbitrarily chosen or described by a given society at a given time. It is very much a grey area and not even consistent in our current time (one "becomes" an adult, under the law, at one age--and at 12:01 am the day of their birthday--in one "civilised" country and another in different one; see The Netherlands vs. the US). Visit any pub (in the US) on the eve of your 21st birthday and they probably won't serve you alcohol until 12:01 am! How arbitrary is that?
Of course, we are forced to draw a line somewhere if our laws are to remain blind and consistent. However, can we rightly conclude an 18-year old immoral to have had sex with his or her 17-year old boyfriend or girlfriend, even if the law concludes he or she has committed an illegal act (this _has_ happened)?(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | from Rain Child
Friday, April 20, 2007 - 15:11
(Agree/Disagree?)
Oddie, while I'm sympathetic, it's bothering me that you didn't report the child porn. I would have personally turned the file over to the police along with the URL it came from. You have to do what you can in this world. You could save some children from going through what happened to that little girl.
Another thing it made me think about, is all the SGAs who abused little girls while in The Family, and are now out and denouncing the cult. What do they feel about their own pasts? I know it was what they were taught was normal, and don't blame them, but now they're in a world where it's very unaccepted, and hopfully by now they have some idea of the damage it causes the child. (And don't say there are no SGAs like that, I happen to have a memory. There were plenty.) It's probably hard for them to say who they are, but anonymously?
(reply to this comment)
| From Oddman
Sunday, April 22, 2007, 00:14
(Agree/Disagree?)
I suppose you're right, rain. But believe you me, that wasn't the first thing on my mind.
The SGA abuser perspective is one I'd also like to hear. I agree, it can be shared anonymously. It's an important piece of the puzzle that has long been missing, and one I had hoped would come up.
I've always theorized that many of the lower tier abusers didn't have so much of an appetite for abusive conduct, but rather took certain actions while suffering Battered Person Syndrome. In some cases, it could even be a low level of Stockholm Syndrome. However, this to me seems reasonable explanation for instances of overboard corporal punishment, and some cases of bullying and harrassing, but not sexual abuse. As far as I've heard from other accounts and as far as I've experienced, I've neither heard, seen, or experienced a case of group sexual abuse.
I'm inclined to think that if one did engage in the sexual abuse of a child, the situation would most likely have been strictly between the perpetrator and the victim, though others in some cases had knowledge of the occurence. It seems unrealistic to me, that one would have been pressured into abusing a child. After all, the pressure to engage in "sharing" could be alleviated by engaging in a sexual act with an adult member.
In a case of a woman sharing with a boy, there could have been pressure on the woman to fulfill her religious responsibilities. Women were generally regarded second class citizens, so (pure speculation) I would not be surprised if a woman was expected to engage in a sexual act with say, a teenage son of a shepherd (or say Ricky) and under Battered Person Syndrome, found it difficult to avoid.
The same dynamics would not likely have been present with man/girl sexual abuse incident. Considering women were to be submissive and available for sharing in TF, there should have been much less reason for a grown male in TF to engage in a sexual act with a girl, than a grown man out of TF to do the same. For this reason, I would consider most men who participated in the sexual abuse of a child to be a fixated pedophile.(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | from Nick
Friday, April 20, 2007 - 14:47
(Agree/Disagree?)
I didn't read your whole post as it was to damn long, but I get the gist and agree.
One of my best friends was a cop. He went to a bar and started drinking with these two women that he quickly found out were Mother and daughter.
Long story short, the mother leaves, he takes the daughter home and shags her. Now lets remember that this chick was in a bar where you expect everyone to be over 21 AND she was with her mother who should not let a 16 yr old drink.
Well as you have probably guessed by now the chick was 16. My buddy was convicted of statutory rape. Kicked of the police force, spent 6 months in Jail and is currently on a 10 yr probation. And on top of that he is now forever on the sex offenders web site along with criminals that rape 3 yr old boys.
They threw the book at him because he was a cop.
Whats ironic is that I own a rental property in the same condo complex that he owns his home in. When I tried to rent it my prospective tenant almost bailed on me because a sex offender lived there and I had to explain his story to her
Anyway, while you all know I am disgusted by pedophiles, in this case I am bitter for my friend. This chick could EASY have passed for 21, much less 18.
(reply to this comment)
| from exister
Friday, April 20, 2007 - 13:44
 (Agree/Disagree?)
I spent a few years working in the State Penitentiary System and stories like yours are a dime a dozen. It is highly likely that having 12 inches of man meat shoved in your unmentionable places will force you to reappraise your salacious encounter.
(reply to this comment)
| from Phoenixkidd
Friday, April 20, 2007 - 13:20
(Agree/Disagree?)
First off you were way too reckless.
Ever heard of the need to protect one's self not only from sickness but from liability??
I've asked for ID once when I had a question. I am serious it's that dangerous out there when it comes to this stuff.
(reply to this comment)
| | | | from vix
Friday, April 20, 2007 - 10:48
(Agree/Disagree?)
Risk of alienation? I wouldn't think so.
This would be a very interesting discussion but unfortunately I don't think I'm capable of properly conveying my views on this extremely contentious subject without getting into a very long and detailed effort, so I think you'll have to do without my participation.
Kudos, though, on attempting to tackle a deeper exploration of one of the only subjects relevant to our upbringing that hasn't already been done to fucking death on this site.
(reply to this comment)
|
|
|
|
|
]
[About the Trailer Park] [Who Links Here]