2
   

Is 'liking children' wrong, if you don't harm kids?

 
 
dlowan
 
  2  
Reply Fri 27 Apr, 2007 01:54 am
CalamityJane wrote:
That's probably the same as if a burglar would go to the police and tell them
he's got the urge to rob someone.

They cannot prosecute him (yet) but the intend to a crime is there,
it's just a matter of time.

So do we commend the burglar for his insight? I think not!


I would have thought it obvious that we do if the burglar is committed to manage his impulses, and is seeking assistance to do so.


Also, I think you are making a very significant error in your thinking...you are equating intent with desire.


I desire not to go to work ever again (sometimes), I desire to grab that lovely scarf which I cannot afford from the shop, I desire a Lippizaner horse, I once greatly desired a sexual relationship with a married colleague.......I do not intend to follow through with any of these desires.
0 Replies
 
CalamityJane
 
  0  
Reply Fri 27 Apr, 2007 08:22 am
Eorl wrote:
Sorry if I seem a little adamant here CJ, but you've still dodged the real point. When you decide not to have compassion for "paedophiles", are you including people who have never hurt a child, but never-the-less have that sexual desire within them? Do you not think it praiseworthy that someone who could do that would voluntarily have themselves prevented from doing so?

I am a father, and no less horrified by the notion than you are. This just seems to be one of those situations where even the hint of something remotely threatening kids apparently justifies the abolition of all human rights to the suspect...even if theY are innocent...just in case...I'm mean this is our kids we are talking about, right?


To be honest Earl, I don't know if I can show compassion towards the
person who confides pedophilic tendencies and hasn't acted on them (yet), resp. seeks help. Contrary to homosexuality, where one cannot help but follow his sexual orientation, I think that someone who has
sexual fantasies about children has a choice to suppress such feelings/fantasies and enter a healthy relationship with an adult, regardless of
the gender.

Yes, admittedly, I might not be able to answer this objectively enough,
having my own child in mind. Sue me!
0 Replies
 
CalamityJane
 
  0  
Reply Fri 27 Apr, 2007 08:38 am
dlowan wrote:
I would have thought it obvious that we do if the burglar is committed to manage his impulses, and is seeking assistance to do so.


Also, I think you are making a very significant error in your thinking...you are equating intent with desire.


I desire not to go to work ever again (sometimes), I desire to grab that lovely scarf which I cannot afford from the shop, I desire a Lippizaner horse, I once greatly desired a sexual relationship with a married colleague.......I do not intend to follow through with any of these desires.


dlowen, desires of materialistic goods is in my opinion not comparable
to sexual fantasies involving children. Even desires or fantasies of a sexual relationship with another adult is perfectly acceptable, however,
sexual desires towards children is in my book an abnormal thinking process that cannot be helped through therapy. Usually, sexual desires/fantasies about children will become intent, and statistics are unfortunately here to prove this. You cannot rehabilitate pedophiles,
and not the ones who have tendencies towards pedophilic actions.
0 Replies
 
Bella Dea
 
  2  
Reply Fri 27 Apr, 2007 09:04 am
Personally, I think it's nasty and don't get it. But if you never do it, there really isn't any harm done, right?

It's kinda like thinking about robbing a bank. It's wrong to rob a bank but if you just think about, no one gets hurt and you don't break the law.

I know someone is going to say something about my cavalier attitude regarding this but whatever.

If a sicko knows he's a sicko and never touches a child or directly brings a child into the picture (like asking them to pose or some how involving them directly into the fantasy) then no harm is done.

Should we jail all people who've thought about murdering someone? Or beating someone up? Or robbing a bank? Or stealing a car?

Of course not. But when they act, we have to. We can't punish the private thoughts of someone but we can punish the deeds that may come out of them.
0 Replies
 
material girl
 
  2  
Reply Fri 27 Apr, 2007 09:08 am
If we are judged on what we think then Id imagine alot of us are mass murderers!

When i was younger I can remember looking at people younger than me and thinking they were really pretty/good looking but I didnt want them/fancy them/or fantasise about them.

When Harry Potter first came out I can recall thinking that Danail Radcliffe was gona become a handsome young man but there was certainly nothing sexual in it.

Im very glad to say I wasnt disapointed and 17 year old Master Radcliffe is an absolute hotty!!!
0 Replies
 
Linkat
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Apr, 2007 10:30 am
Setanta, I believe that this is placed in the religion category probably because as Pentacle describes the thoughts about gays is a believed by many Christians. Many Christians believe that being gay in itself is not wrong, but acting on this - having a homosexual relationship is wrong.

I think it is a bit sick to think of a sexual relationship with a child, same as I would think it sick if some one fantasized about killing and maiming individuals. As far as moral or not, I take the philosophy not to judge others (or at least try not to). However, I would fear that this fantasying could get out of control and would hope they get help. To me if some one were to actively seek help, it would be easier for me to forgive their fantasies.
0 Replies
 
jespah
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Apr, 2007 04:45 pm
I think one distinction should be drawn (my apologies if it has been already) between pure thought and even looking at pictures. Because -- and while of course the rape and abuse of children is the nadir -- child porn and possession of it mean that a person is supporting that economy. Sure, there may be hundreds of copies of one photo, or it could be proliferating around the web, and even on free sites. But viewing those photos means you're giving those sites hits, which translate into cash or services or both. Buying the photos, whether from online or an acquaintance or whatever means that it's, at the root of it all, profitable to exploit children and photograph them. Even if the kids are unaware of the photographing and it's just from the use of a telephoto lens, it's still nonconsensual and props up that segment of the economy and population.

As for photographs of young adults (as in 18 - 21) who are made to look like children, that's not too much different. Sure, ostensibly an 18-year-old is an adult and should be able to make his or her own decisions, even bad ones. And technically porn composed on 18-year-olds, who were 18 when the photographs were taken, is not illegal per se and is certainly not child porn. But what is it, this simulated child porn? I think it feeds again into that aspect of the culture. It's good, surely, that minors are not being exploited, but the 18-year-old isn't necessarily a mature decision-maker -- we just draw a bright-line distinction because that's the standard that's been set in the law when it comes to such things. But does it feed into that economy? I would argue that it does. Perhaps only to serve as a gateway, e. g. hey, you love those 18-year-olds, here are some 17-year-olds. And some 12-year-olds. And 10. And 5. And 2. It does give one pause.
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Apr, 2007 05:07 pm
I don't know enough about the psychological stuff going on, since I don't read up on this subject, not having had to read up on it. But, given all that, I've my own un-defended by data take that people attracted to children may be, or probably are, among the abused as children themselves.

In that situation, I can have empathy or, maybe it's sympathy, for the now adult trying to not act on attraction that developed by confusing forces, perhaps even parents, in that person's childhood.
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  2  
Reply Fri 27 Apr, 2007 06:19 pm
CalamityJane wrote:
dlowan wrote:
I would have thought it obvious that we do if the burglar is committed to manage his impulses, and is seeking assistance to do so.


Also, I think you are making a very significant error in your thinking...you are equating intent with desire.


I desire not to go to work ever again (sometimes), I desire to grab that lovely scarf which I cannot afford from the shop, I desire a Lippizaner horse, I once greatly desired a sexual relationship with a married colleague.......I do not intend to follow through with any of these desires.


dlowen, desires of materialistic goods is in my opinion not comparable
to sexual fantasies involving children. Even desires or fantasies of a sexual relationship with another adult is perfectly acceptable, however,
sexual desires towards children is in my book an abnormal thinking process that cannot be helped through therapy. Usually, sexual desires/fantasies about children will become intent, and statistics are unfortunately here to prove this. You cannot rehabilitate pedophiles,
and not the ones who have tendencies towards pedophilic actions.


That's a lot of very adamant stuff based on very little known fact, as far as I can see. What do you know of ALL the people who have some desire towards children?


Many people have some desires towards children...not all act on them.

And...what do you mean by rehabilitate?

Do you mean that they no longer have such desires, or that they do not act on them?

What do you see as the proper attitude towards them, btw? You say you have no compassion....do you have some explanation for why they have these abnormal thoughts?


I am also interested in what all this stuff that floats around (or has here, recently, somebody going so far as to state that having compassion for somebody meant approving of their actions...) re not having compassion.


Here's a thing.....many people who have sexual feelings for kids were eroticised to kids of that age because they were abused themselves at that age.


Are we to have no compassion for them? These were the very kids that people seem to think having no compassion for their abusers somehow benefits, or that seems in some way to be the argument...? Is it? Why do people seem to feel having no compassion for someone is somehow a good? If I have this right...I am really interested to understand this.

So....some of these kids for whom we are, I assume, allowed to have compassion, grow into these people for whom we are not, it seems, supposed to have any?


Then there are all the kids and adolescents who have sexual feelings towards younger kids...as far as the research tells us, for a varirty of reasons...(which I can detail for you, if you like.)


Research suggests there is a pretty good rate of successful treatment for them, but it seems you would not agree with this? I was listening to research stats from the adolescent program here, who were saying that theirs are not unusually good...but I didn't write them down. One of the most important parts of treatment for these kids is full acknowledgment of what they have done, and what they wish to do, and I congratulate the guts of people who can face that side of themselves, and change it.


You know, "real", habitual, paedophiles are some of the saddest people I have ever met.

I was talking to one of the detectives in our local paedophile task force the other day ( I am treating one of his target's little victims, who is now targetting younger children than himself), and we agreed that there is something in the air around them that sucks your life force out....kind of like black holes... And their stories are some of the saddest I have ever heard....and I feel like I have heard them all...

The saddest thing of all is how some of them are so damaged by these experiences...(for many of them the attention and affection they got from their abuser/s was pretty much the closest thing to love they ever feel they got) that they have, with that ability we humans have to make ourselves believe that what we want is a good thing, made themselves believe that their abuse of kids is good for them.


These people ARE dangerous predators....and kids need to be protected from them....if this means permanent prison, so be it. I still feel lots of compassion for them in their terrible blighted lives, though, at the same time as they drive me nuts...especially when I read their twisted propaganda on places like NAMBLA type sites, or hear their ravings in court.

I don't work with these folk, so I do not know if you are right that no treatment can ever help them to at least control their impulses.....I would be highly suspicious both of those of them who claim to be in control and "safe", and also of your utterly absolutist statement.


For adults, it is certainly a damned hard thing to change....in my experience it is not impossible...it is certainly not impossible for younger people.

But anywho, that was not the question of the thread.

That was a much simpler one....if we desire, but do not act, have we done wrong.

In my view, it's a bummer if we have those impulses, but if we really do not act upon them, then no foul.


Edit: THis proly sounds fiercer than it is meant to....I have been getting increasingly more horrified at stuff about not having any compassion for people, and seeing them as monsters and such.....I would expound on this, if anyone were interested, but in short hand, I think that condemning people out of hand, and trying to deny the commonness of their feelings (while thankfully some of those feelings are not commonly avcted upon) is psychologically unhelpful, and practically dangerous, as people find it hard to think rationally about and seek help for feelings that it is taboo to acknowledge......also, in terms of whether we act out dangerous feelings or not, our abiity to reflect upon them, {nd not hide them away from ourselves, or dangerously fixate on them,}is very strongly tied to positive outcomes. I hope that bizarre sentence is clear! I can explain this addendum at better length if anyone wants me to.

So...sorry if i sound fierce, my fierceness is not aimed at you......and I am very interested to understand your points better.)
0 Replies
 
CalamityJane
 
  0  
Reply Fri 27 Apr, 2007 07:42 pm
First off, I happen to live in a town where pedophiles and child pornography
rings are a high statistic, probably due to our proximity to Mexico. Organized "fishing trips" to Mexico are in reality sexual encounters between pedophiles and small Mexican children. The parents usually bring their
children to designated apartments where they spend the weekend with
their "fishing buddies". Pictures and videos are made right at the spot
and immediately distributed throughout the pedophile world via internet.

Within the last 5 years we've had numerous children molested and murdered by pedophiles. Another case involved a x-ray technician at
Children's hospital who molested and videotaped sick children for 10 +
years. A child psychiatrist for the state was found guilty of child molestation
a few years back, and the list goes on and on.

Yes, I do have compassion, but only for the children itself.

Frankly dlowan, I personally don't know any person who confessed to me a sexual desire for children, and I am certain that the ones who do have
desire towards children, keep their mouth shut!

When I said you cannot rehabilitate pedophiles it means that they cannot be cured. The desire or the intent to have sexual relations with children
is always present. They always will have these desires and will act
on them. I am talking about pedophiles, not a teen who has fantasies about another teen or younger child.

Do I have an explanation why they have these abnormal thoughts?
The origin of it is probably as individual as they themselves. Sure, some of them were abused and molested as children, but not all of them. There
might be a genetic link, there might be a dominance issue, and many
other reasons why one becomes a pedophile.

Yes, it is a pity that the abused will become the abuser, however, of
all the adults who were abused as children, only a fraction will become
the abuser. It is not an excuse, in my book.

If you have any data where pedophiles are successfully treated
over a prolonged period of time, I would be very interested in seeing
it.

I can appreciate that from your angle, you feel compassion for them,
especially when receiving their personal history, however, I do not
extend such feelings towards them.

We are using our train of thought process to understand what these people might be going through, and that's probably a mistake, since we don't comprehend that a pedophile cannot stop himself from having these
sexual desires/fantasies/actions.

Similar to this: I can drink a glass of wine and not have another one for months on end, and for an alcoholic a glass of wine would be another go into the habit.

Could write more, have to go to the airport.....
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  2  
Reply Fri 27 Apr, 2007 09:33 pm
Can I determine your definitions, CJ, before I respond...and question...further.


I am confused.....initially you seemed to me to hold that any thoughts of "liking" kids lead to action and therefore anyone who has ANY such desires is a sexual abuser. Do I have you correctly?

( I think, after lots of arguing here, that this is the actual definition, btw....ie having sexual feelings for kids = paedophile. However, people working in the area..including me....generally, in practice, use paedophile to mean someone whose major sexual activity is with kids, and who has abused numbers of them. I would like to suggest using paedophile in this discussion to mean this latter type of person, if we can agree to do so, simply for ease of reference. If not, we will need to agree on other terms.I am aware that the way I normally use the term is technically incorrect. )

Later, you seem to be drawing a distinction, as I would, between people who have sexual desire for kids, and people who have actived upon them.

I would also draw distinctions between people who have acted upon such desires once, or a couple of times, and people for whom it is a sexual career.


Could you clarify for me how you see the terms of the discussion, because this will affect, of course, how I respond.
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Apr, 2007 09:39 pm
I've always wanted to masturbate while taking a **** in Martha Stewarts pocketbook.... is that wrong?
0 Replies
 
Mame
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Apr, 2007 09:42 pm
Bi-Polar Bear wrote:
I've always wanted to masturbate while taking a **** in Martha Stewarts pocketbook.... is that wrong?


YES.
0 Replies
 
CalamityJane
 
  0  
Reply Fri 27 Apr, 2007 10:01 pm
dlowan wrote:
Can I determine your definitions, CJ, before I respond...and question...further.

I am confused.....initially you seemed to me to hold that any thoughts of "liking" kids lead to action and therefore anyone who has ANY such desires is a sexual abuser. Do I have you correctly?


No, that's not what I said or meant: What I did say is that if one has sexual fantasies about children sooner or later will act upon it. The term "sexual abuse" is used when it actually happens thus a sexual abuser is
someone who physically molested.

And when I refer to pedophiles it means that this person has engaged
in either child pornography, sexual activity with children, and/or is involved in pedophilic paraphernalia.

In my last post I spoke basically of convicted pedophiles and hard core
pedophiles (unfortunately not convicted yet).

Now I have a question for you: person A is having wild fantasies about
sexual encounters with children, and person B is looking at those wild
fantasies online. Where do you - if at all - distinguish?
0 Replies
 
Mills75
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Apr, 2007 10:06 pm
Mame wrote:
Bi-Polar Bear wrote:
I've always wanted to masturbate while taking a **** in Martha Stewarts pocketbook.... is that wrong?


YES.

But only because it would clash. :wink:
0 Replies
 
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Sat 28 Apr, 2007 12:45 pm
You become what you feed your mind upon.

"Liking children" is only a hop-scotch jump away from lusting after children. If you are not a child then "liking children" is a perversion and a gross indecency.

Usually people who "like children" have other significant problems like offering them drugs, gifts and money. These have devastating consequences on a child state of mind and well being. (look how Anna Nichole turned out...)

Liking children in a sexual way is a sickness that needs immediate attention before it turns into a crime. As one gets older "children" become older, if the lust still remains for prepubescent adolescents then there is a serious problem, stop it!

For me when a person is below consenting age another person takes over "mentally", a caring protective father like figure, not a possible mate or buddy "someday"...

Anyone attracted to a child needs to clean out their brain (with God), focus it elsewhere and get a life of their own. People think that they themselves are so young looking but they are really old and lecherous. They live in a delusion. Maybe these people who "like children" might learn from a drooling, wrinkle faced, toothless, senior citizen groping THEM!, this might change their perspective on "robbing the cradle" a bit...

Liking children is simply other words for pedophilia and lust, it is sick and perverted and these people need to be taught a lesson before they end up deservedly hooked on jail bait.

If they really liked children, they would leave them and let them grow up and be children as long as they can. Life comes soon enough where they have to face this often rotten and disgusting world of Hooters strip joints, jock strings and sicko teachers lusting after them while they are trying to get a wholesome education.
0 Replies
 
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Sat 28 Apr, 2007 01:39 pm
Parents need to "like" and hug their kids (i.e. Alex Baldwin). Then their kids will not seek this love and affection in the wrong people.
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 Apr, 2007 10:21 pm
CalamityJane wrote:
. . . . Frankly dlowan, I personally don't know any person who confessed to me a sexual desire for children, and I am certain that the ones who do have
desire towards children, keep their mouth shut!

When I said you cannot rehabilitate pedophiles it means that they cannot be cured. The desire or the intent to have sexual relations with children
is always present. They always will have these desires and will act
on them. I am talking about pedophiles, not a teen who has fantasies about another teen or younger child. .....
My wife and I are friends with a husband and wife team who specialize in the treatment of sexual offenders who are court ordered for treatment. Many of their patients are child molesters. They claim remarkable success. Of course, they screen those who they accept for treatment, so their results can arguably be described as skewed.

One of the biggest obstacles they face is the draconian attitude of society, reflected in lawmakers. Lets face it. When you're told you are the worst of the scum of the earth, deserving only of castration or firing squad, and incapable of change, you are not likely to seek treatment, especially knowing that treatment professionals are bound by law to report you to the authorities. Those who have not acted on their thoughts are likewise not inclined to step up for counseling, a condition they assure me is almost certain to lead to eventual disaster.

I have a great deal of respect for the work they do. They take an awful lot of flack for their efforts.

Personally, I don't believe there is any character disorder that cannot be overcome, albeit often with great effort.
0 Replies
 
aidan
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 Apr, 2007 11:21 pm
A movie that explores this issue somewhat sensitively and with intelligence is "The Woodsman" with Kevin Bacon. It gave a thoughtful, or at least non-inflammatory, thought provoking perspective.

I guess I think if someone was having obsessive thoughts about having sex with children- and they knew that was truly their desire to the exclusion of sex with other adults- they'd be pedophiles- clinically speaking.

But as D. Lowan said, I do think there is a big difference between thinking and acting. And I don't believe that everyone who thinks does act. I also agree with Neologist that making treatment options known and available without the accompanying disgust and universal condemnation of a person for being something they might be ashamed to admit even to themselves, would probably go a long way in at least leading those who are still thinking and haven't yet acted, to want to do what they can to get help more often that they do now.

I also agree that when a person has a behavioral issue or problem- outright and universal disgust, condemnation and messages telling them they are utterly hopeless, will only increase their feelings of worthlessness, hopelessness and isolation, and perpetuate the problem.

Unless you want to round these people up and put them in a leper's colony- there has to be a more productive way to look at the issue. Certainly the way we're approaching it now isn't working. Maybe it's just my imagination, or the easy availability through the internet- but it certainly seems to be becoming more and more commonplace and less of a strange deviance.
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  2  
Reply Mon 30 Apr, 2007 12:52 am
CalamityJane wrote:
dlowan wrote:
Can I determine your definitions, CJ, before I respond...and question...further.

I am confused.....initially you seemed to me to hold that any thoughts of "liking" kids lead to action and therefore anyone who has ANY such desires is a sexual abuser. Do I have you correctly?


No, that's not what I said or meant: What I did say is that if one has sexual fantasies about children sooner or later will act upon it. The term "sexual abuse" is used when it actually happens thus a sexual abuser is
someone who physically molested.

And when I refer to pedophiles it means that this person has engaged
in either child pornography, sexual activity with children, and/or is involved in pedophilic paraphernalia.

In my last post I spoke basically of convicted pedophiles and hard core
pedophiles (unfortunately not convicted yet).

Now I have a question for you: person A is having wild fantasies about
sexual encounters with children, and person B is looking at those wild
fantasies online. Where do you - if at all - distinguish?


Ok...I know you are plain wrong, factually speaking, in your claim:

"What I did say is that if one has sexual fantasies about children sooner or later will act upon it."



This is simply not true.


I am interested in where you get your absolutist belief about it and what back up you have?


People can and do seek help for such fantasies......and I am personally aware of a number of people who have such fantasies and have not acted upon them.


That they have had people with whom they felt able to share their concerns about their fantasies, and learn to deal with them safely, has been very important.


That being said, such fantasies DO indeed frequently lead to abusive acts.


We do not have an agreed upon definition of paedophile, so I will have to come back later when I have a lot more time to respond to some of your previous posts.

I agree absolutely with whoever said that indulging oneself in such fantasies is a very dangerous thing to do.

For that reason I would be raising my index of concern more in relation to the person who is seeking out stuff on the net to fuel their fantasies, since this person is, in my view, further down the track towards acting abusively. (Though individual circumstances might change my view re individual people.)


If they are looking at internet porn featuring kids, they have ALREADY acted abusively, in my view, since their action in paying for the stuff, or supporting a site with such material, supports actual abuse of actual kids, and they are co abusers.

Also, online, they are very likely to be viewing material justifying child abuse, and thus they are at risk of having their cognitive and emotional inhibitions against abusing kids further compromised, as well as finding networks to inculcate them into networks training and assisting them in increasingly abusive activities.


Some kiddy porn sharing sites also demand a contribution of such material from any new member.


The internet and paedophilia as a combination scares the bejesus out of me...for the reasons stated above, and others.


That being said, there may, for all I know, be individuals who visit fake kiddy porn sites, which they know to be fake, and deal with their impulses that way, and never move on to anything else
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

700 Inconsistencies in the Bible - Discussion by onevoice
Why do we deliberately fool ourselves? - Discussion by coincidence
Spirituality - Question by Miller
Oneness vs. Trinity - Discussion by Arella Mae
give you chills - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence for Evolution! - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence of God! - Discussion by Bartikus
One World Order?! - Discussion by Bartikus
God loves us all....!? - Discussion by Bartikus
The Preambles to Our States - Discussion by Charli
 
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 12/14/2019 at 12:13:39