I think you’ve detected my point! There would be no reason to call because there is nothing to report.
Yes, I have. I’m a little skeptical of the highest numbers but I am not up to date on all the research.
It has no bearing whatsoever because by definition recidivism is REOFFENDING- usually after being caught. So it has nothing to do with first offenses.
One wonders if he’s done a lot of traveling to countries where it IS legal. Aren’t there nations in the east where child brothels are common? And I don’t believe for a second that he doesn’t own SOME type of child porn.
Based on my experience of how the police track potential child sex offenders in my jurisdiction, you have a poor imagination. Of course YMMV depending on how police handle such matters where you are.
So, tell us, how DO the police track potential child sex offenders in your jurisdiction?
http://www.billmauro.onmpp.ca/pressreleases.aspx?id=44
Track them down through their internet use, monitor what they do over the internet, then scoop their computers and nail them for child porn, or set up a sting for luring.
It’s taken very seriously here, with an emphasis on proactive investigation and enforcement, and close cooperation between different police agencies.
What do the police do where you are?
Never read the book.
Were you planning to point out the flaws in this hypothetical untreated child’s reasoning?
Also, you’re still using made-up terms. Real words do exist for the concept you’re trying to convey. I’ve provided them for you repeatedly.
“No true Scotsman” waiting to happen.
I have no idea where you’re getting this bizzare idea that your recollections are objectively superior and more accurate than mine. Fact is, our anecdotal experiences and gut instincts cancel one another out in a debate. That’s why people tend to start using things like citations and independently verifiable facts.
Got a better cite?
Well, it’s hard to argue with SCIENCE! Mainly because SCIENCE! is what you use to make monsters out of body parts, death rays, and radiation mutated guard dogs. Nothing to do with actual science, which happens to support my arguments.
Define the adult concept of a healthy romantic relationship. You’ve so completely managed to define the child’s concept of a relationship, you should have no trouble applying the same thoroughness and insight to defining what it is children are inherently incapable of ever comprehending, yes?
Ah, the old lash out at someone because they remind you of your own failings routine. Got it. Me, I’ve long since gotten over the self-hate. Hopefully one day you’ll manage the same.
Where did I suggest anyone was signaling that to me? Seriously, do you read any of this, or just assume that I fit whatever steriotype image you have constructed in your head?
You know, if I ever do feel an inclination to get a psychiatric analysis, I’ll seek one from someone far more qualified than some random bigot on a message board who can’t seem to get over a basic confirmation bias.
Explain it to me. We’re both adults after all, so we ought to be able to understand it. Then you can explain why no child could ever understand what you just wrote.
Even if we assume 50% of the identifed pedophiles were false positives, the numbers I used still demonstrate that a nonpedophile is more likely to molest a child than a pedophile is.
It’s just that the play is so much more famous, I’d have expected that to turn up first, suggesting either a pre-existing knowledge of the anime, or a stroll through my post history. But that’s neither here nor there.
Do you see some sort of flaw with this reasoning?
And your belief in this impossibility is based on what exactly?
No, but neither of our estimations of the probabilities are even remotely relevant.
Because my particular age of attraction has absolutely nothing to do with the legal reforms I am proposing, obviously.
The entire point of guardianship is to take the power over a person’s life and put it in the hands of someone other than that person. Add to that the fact that the guardian is the legal owner of any property the individual would otherwise be considered to own (hense why they can take things like gifts from other people away from the child as punishment), and we have a number of paralells.
The path to correcting those social structures lies, among other places, in tearing down the laws which relegate children to the status of second-class citizens at best, and human chattel at worst.
I haven’t seen any proof of such harm. Do you have some to present? I’ve been looking for it for some time now.
And your unbacked accusations are hardly encouraging me to go out of my way for you either.
Relveance? Beyond the obvious ad-hominim attack, I mean.
Yes.
I don’t think you understand the nature of the relationships I would like to have.
Age is not the same thing as awareness or knowledge. Why is this so difficult a concept?
Nell?
Have you seen the RMSC proposal?
No. I’m saying nothing of the sort. Me finding someone attractive does not say anything one way or the other about their ability to consent.
Define “physical knowledge”. What do breasts and pubic hair have to do with knowledge and understanding?
Only because you seem to assume that knowledge is inherently bad, or that what I would be doing would have little, if anything, to do with passing on knowledge. It’s less a vicious cycle than it is you choosing to assume things without any reason.
An end to age lines in all areas of society. Bodily domain being just one important area of debate.
Some can’t. I don’t discount the ability of all of them as you seem to be implying.
Because none of my proposals have anything to do with my age of attraction, obviously.
Would you (or anyone else) rather I just lied about my interests and actually engaged in the sort of dishonest deception people seem to think I’ve been engaging in already?
Seems to me such a tactic is practically guarenteed to blow up in my face. Best to put it all out on the table in the beginning, so you don’t get caught in a lie later on.
I wrote it (along with another individual who has given express permission to repost it as I see fit), so there are no copyright issues.
So, you plan on raping such a woman if you feel you could get away with it, and you believe we should be looking to you as an example of normalcy?
In other words, the only position you will accept from me is crippling self-loathing. Good thing I’ve long since moved on from caring what you think.
Well, you are.
Any particular reason this is so controversial a concept?
More like unproven assertions. If you can present something with actual backing that’d really go a long way towards making me give a rat’s ass about you continuing to assert this.
Wow, hard to decide where to begin. I guess first off, it’s 0-10, not 0-12. I’ve never found ignorance particularly attractive, and my sexual attractions to prepubescents are entirely rooted in the lack of secondary sex characteristics.
Actually, I just thought it was getting rediculus when they compared my penis to a child’s forearm. Have you seen a child’s forearm?
While a lot of internally contradictory things have been attributed to me, I’ve tried to keep what I actually say relatively consistent.
That this is a great victory, and that we’ve finally got a system in place for this important right which doesn’t use arbitrary age lines, but real, measurable, relevent criteria. Good news all around.
A bit of disapointment that the results turned out as they did, but overall, quite positive feelings on the whole situation.
Yep, because now there’d be actual evidence in support of that proposition. Not to mention the fact that if the impossible should happen at some point in the future, said child would not be arbitrarily denied their rights.
In and of itself, no. Suspicious statistical groupings might suggest some doctoring or process issues, but not having anyone under a certain age pass would not, in itself, suggest anything at all wrong with the test, regardless of what that age happened to be.
You are aware that we have this concept called “rape” whereby if you don’t want sex, and someone forces you into it, it’s still a crime, right? Being allowed to say “yes” doesn’t take away the ability to say “no”.
More a matter of the criminality of it being a significant contributing factor to the way such children are treated. But please, go on.
I assumed this was a reference to my so called “trolling”.
Maybe I should report you. Have the police confescate your computer, turn your life upside down, and tell everyone around you that you’re under investigation for sexually abusing children. If you’re really innocent, you have nothing to fear, right?
A troll who’d taken to stalking me over on another forum some time ago decided that one of the people arguing against me wasn’t being extreme enough in her positions (and was getting annoyed that the troll was spamming in the forum), so the troll hacked her account, sent her personal information to her local police, and caused her considerable trouble. She’s currently pursuing legal action. Of course, she had nothing to hide too…
You clearly didn’t read the proposal. You only have to take the test once. Think of it like a driving test. You don’t need to take a new test every time you buy a new car.
Never had any interest in fucking prostitutes of any age, personally.
Considering Target Ads can qualify as child porn under some interpretations of the law…
I don’t know why you post here and you have been here far longer than he has.
I am disappointed that you would tell such a blatant lie.
So stop criticizing the mods and go back to something milder, like suggesting it would be great if we changed the laws so you could fuck preschool children.
You blatantly lie about me but you’re “disappointed” in Dutchman?
I guess we can add hypocrite to that stellar CV.
I’ve bolded the bit that’s significant. I agree with the statement as posted, but I’m not sure I’d agree that there would be any trauma if the sexual contact was wanted, and there were no legal repercussions. For instance, how traumatized are the New Guinean tribesmen who have to suck dick to become men? How traumatized were the eromenoi?
If someone’s ready for sex, they’re ready for sex. Myself, I wasn’t, and I’ve yet to meet anyone who was, but I don’t discount the idea. I have met 13yos who were, so the idea isn’t that strange to me. I realise those three years are quite a big gap in quite a fast-changing time in a young person’s life, so not finding any precocious 10yos would also not surprise me.
I thought the idea was you took it (well, passed it) once, and then you had a permanent “sex license”, as it were. carding someone should be even less of an arousal dampener than finding the condom, in that case.
Actually, I rather believe it does.Or else there are a lot of bottoms out there that have valid assault cases.
Fuck, by Mother Grundy standards, *I *“own some type of child porn”. I believe I’ve even linked to some in a photography thread.
People are making up shit to get offended about here.
Congratulations, that’s the first intelligent thing you’ve said since you joined this message board.
Target ads?? Heck, for someone in your position, even a Powderpuff Girls DVD would raise eyebrows.
Cesario, I’m starting to wonder if your whole pedophile image is something you’ve just made up to get attention from people. You’ve shown no interest in debating the matter rationally, and you’ve been consistently snarky and confrontational when people challenge your belief system. You clearly have no sense of how you come across to people, nor have you shown any concern for how utterly stupid and immature you are making yourself look. I’m actually starting to feel sorry for the members of GirlChat for having someone like you as a spokesman – frankly, if I were one of them, you would be the last person I would want arguing on my behalf.
For your sake, I hope you’re just a petty troll. If not, then you are clearly delusional, and your obsession with children pales in comparison to your obsession with stupidity.
Both examples refer to rituals which are/were fully endorsed and accepted by their particular cultures, which makes a HUGE difference. There’s also a coming-of-age mentality inherently ingrained in the relationship, which simply does not exist in society at large today.
Mate, the whole thing smells of troll. Of course troll is not an exclusive conclusion.
For your sake, I hope you’re just a petty troll. If not, then you are clearly delusional, and your obsession with children pales in comparison to your obsession with stupidity.
[/QUOTE]
As opposed to your CV, which appears to be so petty that you need to play school yard “My Daddy can beat your daddy” type games?
One would rather suspect that given a world of limited resources, in reality, that said police track based on something other than trolling a message board. Else your police are idiots and wasting much time chasing after 19 years amusing themselves by fucking around with the easily jerked around. Monitoring child oriented areas and monitoring paedophile oriented sites is rational. Reacting to this tripe is sheer stupidity.
So you agree the trauma is a social construct derived from societal disdain, and not inherent in the mere existence of an adult-child romantic relationship, then? Leaving aside the notions of physical trauma and outright rape for the moment.
And by “does not exist in society at large today” I assume you mean a strictly secular Eurocentric one, because coming-of-age rituals are a big deal in large parts of my society. Plus you’re excluding an awful lot of people in “your” society there, from Jews(bris, bar/bat mitzvah) to Mormons (mission), Amish(raumspringe), Hindus(lots of different ones), Catholics(baptism, 1st communion), etc.
I’m not sure how a CV can be petty, but in any event…my Dad CAN beat up your Dad!
Actually, probably not. He was a professor of English and Comparative Literature. A very smart guy, but maybe not a bigtime fighter.
Frankly, I think that the SDMB is an exceptional place, and I do have to wonder if it is being run by amateurs and shoe salesmen.
But for this thread, the only evidence in play is the stupidty of TPTB allowing a pedo to foster and promote behaviour that is illegal in the US.
Cesario says:
umm, hmmm. So someone stalks you, but hacks the person running the site instead of hacking you. That makes about as much sense as your other claims. If it was some sort of site promoting child abuse then the police could take the woman’s claims seriously.