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?
dlowen, 2 pages ago I have asked you already for data to support
If you have any data where pedophiles are successfully treated over a prolonged period of time, I would be very interested in seeing it.
which you have not replied to or
chose to ignore. Now you're telling me I am plain wrong and I should
supply data to you.
If this is the discussion style you're promoting, I don't mind, but you're
discrediting yourself here.
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.
No dispute here. Why shouldn't pedophiles seek help for such fantasies,
and if they have not acted upon them simply means over what period
of time, dlowen?
That being said, such fantasies DO indeed frequently lead to abusive acts.
Right! As I feel that a pedophile cannot help himself to keep it at fantasies only.
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.
Let the American Psychiatric Association define it for us:
The American Psychiatric Association in its main diagnostic manual, the DSM-IV TR, defines a pedophile as somebody who “over a period of six months, [has] recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges or behaviors involving sexually activity with a prepubescent child or children (generally age 13 or younger)”.
So, according to the APA, a person having sexual fantasies about children is considered a pedophile.
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.)
No objection here.
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.
Where we disagree in, dlowan, is the technicalities. You are assuming that pedophiles are curable with the right treatment, whereas I claim that
pedophiles cannot help themselves with their orientation, similar to
homosexuality, where you cannot "cure" the person into heterosexuality.
Pedophilia is a lifelong sexual preference towards children and most
clinical and forensic organizations will agree to this.
You are the one making the extreme claim, CJ, and you have given NO data of ANY kind to support it.
The onus of support is on you.
I have not, btw asserted that habitual paedophiles can be rehabilitated.
I have simply questioned your absolutist claim that this can NEVER occur, and have asked you for evidence. My view was, and still is, that I do not know...but I doubt any such absolutist claim about people such as you have repeatedly made here.
You keep moving the debate all over the shop.
Let us be clear.
1. The claim you are making that I am disputing is that anyone who ever has a fantasy about a child will abuse a child sooner or later.
I am not debating you about whether or not habitual abusers can ever be stopped from doing so. I have no position on that, except to react with scepticism against your absolutist stance.
I am happy to look that up when I have time....I do not now, and it is not what I am debating about.
You also need to be clear, btw, about whether you speak of ceasing all impulse or ceasing abusive activity when you talk about "rehabilitation".
Though, come to think of it, your utterly unsubstantiated claim that impulse ALWAYS leads to action would, I suppose, make your confusion here understandable, since you claim them to be one and the same.
I think it would be daft to think that one can stop impulse (even with aversive therapies which are still used in the USA, but not in the UK or Oz)..."rehabilitation" would be about ensuring behavioural control.
As for examples that people can have the impulse and not act on it?
1. Son of friend.
Called his dad late one night, when he was babysitting his partner's toddler. Said he wanted his dad to come over, because he had become aware that he was having impulses to touch the child's penis and was becoming aroused by them. Was horrified and appalled (had not previously been alone with child).
When his dad came, he left dad to care for child, he was so distressed that he went to POLICE, and reported himself as a paedophile because he had had the impulse!
Sought therapy the next day, with partner's invovement, and safety boundaries immediately set up...partner was shocked, too, and chose to end relationship.
Now, this man is in another reationship, but has chosen never to involve himself with a woman who has young children...his partners and friends are aware of the issue, and clear bounaries are in place re contact with kids.
He maintains contact with therapist.
I guess one can never know what the future holds, but here is a person who had a fantasy about abusing a child and who acted responsibly and got help to support his decision never to act upon such thoughts.
One example zaps you, btw, since your claim is so absolutist....though you can, of course, choose to doubt my example...shrugs.....
2. Gay friend, abused as kid, left home at 12, on streets for years, supported himself by prostitution........
Made friends with gay guys in my circle, and found himself suddenly exposed to families with kids.
Sat down with a group of us, and said he was aware of sexual feelings towards the kids.....
Again, sought help, and there was a clear safety plan set up.
Parents in the group informed, with his consent, and people made decisions re socializing with him.
Safety plans set up, and friends and therapist monitor his actions.
I am interested, CJ...you seem amost proud that you know nobody who would have such feelings, or at least who would tell you about them.
Am I correct? If so why?
Why, especially, would you be pleased that people would not tell you of such feelings, if I am correct about this?
It comes back, for me, to utter puzzlement about feeling good about having no compassion for people with awful impulses.
Your stance I find not only puzzling, but actually almost dangerous, when it is, as I think it to be, shared by so many.
The thing is, IF people have abusive impulses, it is helpful if they can face them and own them. Especially if their eroticisation of children is linked to their own abuse, or traumatic witnessing of the abuse of others.
Such utterly negative stances as yours, when they are the norm, make it very hard for people to do this at a stage when they have not become part of a self affirming abusive culture, since the shame inculcated makes it very hard to acknowledge and deal rationally with the impulses.
If someone is dealing with such desires, do you think it better that they are in a circle of people aware of, and able to assist with, them? That they feel able to ask for help if they feel about to act, or that they deal with the impulses alone and in secrecy? That they are able to seek help with behavioural and cognitive structures to minimize and deal with temptation, or that they are struggling in secrecy?
The greatest friend of abuse, in my mind, is secrecy and shame.