Probably mixed up a couple of threads I’ve participated in on-line - it’s not like I go back and intensively review every pedo thread ever on the Straight Dope every time the subject comes up. Why would I? This is an on-line message board, not a scholarly research project.
So you’re not interested in accuracy when you post. That’s good to know.
[Moderating]
However, this is the General Questions forum. What are valued here are facts. Personal opinions and vague recollections are not particularly useful here. Unless you can back up your assertions with cites, it’s best just to drop them.
Let’s refrain from personal remarks in this forum.
Colibri
General Questions Moderator
Very well - there is this post where someone declares the intention of purchasing any books of MZB he finds at a garage sales and burning them, which pretty clearly comes under the destruction of an author’s work and discouraging/preventing others from reading them.
Is one cite from this forum sufficient? It’s going to have to be - I’ve already spent more time wading through the past postings than I really cared to.
It’s possible that that person was still on parole or probation, and was barred from possessing or writing such material under the rules of said parole or probation.
People who identify as pedophiles make the distinction between being “offending” and “non-offending”. Child molesters may all be pedophiles, but certainly not all pedophiles are child molesters.
Also, people with paraphilias, such as pedophilia or necrophilia, can have an exclusive paraphilia (the only thing that arouses them) or a non-exclusive paraphilia (just one of the things that arouse them).
Lots of people are aroused by something but do not act on it. For example, most people are aroused by adults. However, most adults are not sexually available to us. Most of us do not have sex with most of the people we find arousing. Equating arousal with action is, in this sense, like assuming most people are rapists.
And lots of people are celibate long term. Lots of people don’t have a romantic partner, or find themselves in sexless marriages, and don’t find release with other people.
A non-offending pedophile could seek counseling for other life issues, and in counseling in general it doesn’t always work to wall off parts of your world and exclude them from the discussion. And, a non-offending pedophile could seek counseling specifically for pedophilia without it being about managing not to offend. There would be a lot that is difficult about being an exclusive pedophile even for people who are never going to offend and are secure in their control. Likewise, for most of us, we might be unable to build or sustain romantic relationships and may need help dealing with that pain, without the help being about resisting committing rape.
I think we could really use some studies that establish whether fictional child pornography (that does not involve any real children) somehow induces people to commit crimes they otherwise would not have. If it does induce crimes, then there would be at least a reasonable debate about outlawing it (though outlawing fiction that induces crimes is not even a slam dunk). But if it does not induce crimes, and especially if it offers some kind of alternative, I think there’s no way it should be outlawed.
Ermm, only if you think one guy at garage sales is sufficient to “destroy her entire body of work”. I don’t, BTW.
I don’t think he’s sufficient to get the job done either, but that wasn’t the question. The question was whether or not the sentiment actually exists. Clearly, there is at least one person who has expressed the notion.
I certainly wouldn’t support doing anything that benefits a molester financially. If MZB (to pick one example) was still alive and writing I doubt I’d purchase anything more of her work. I’d prefer any profits from the continued sale of her work either go to her victims or some charity that benefits victims of such abuse but I have no say in where those profits go.
Actually, I think he was being sarcastic. Drunky Smurf often is.
That is also a possibility…
I’ve been kinda spotty in keeping up with the thread, but is this a fair summary of the answer to the OP question? The available help for for potential pedophiles amounts to talking to some German therapists.
One possible summary of this thread might be: There are some who think it would be in the best interests of society to rehabilitate (“fix”) pedophiles, if possible, but because the subject is soooooooo taboo, it seems that there is little body of knowledge or research on how to do that, or whether it’s even possible. There are others who think pedophiles are unsalvageable witches who should just be burned at the stake and be done with them, which attitude seems to prevail in society currently, which is why there’s no body of knowledge or research on what to do about them.
They treat and research pedophilia at Johns Hopkins:
Johns Hopkins Sexual Behaviors Consultation Unit
The Sexual Behaviors Consultation Unit is committed to excellence in the evaluation and treatment of intimate relationship problems in adults and psychosexual disorders in children, adolescents and adults; in medical education for physicians; and in human sexuality research. (See Conditions We Treat)
The Sexual Behaviors Consultation Unit (SBCU) was established in 1971 as a specialty clinic within The Johns Hopkins Hospital.The SBCU offers evaluation and treatment for sexually related problems, including sexual dysfunctions, paraphilias, and gender-identity concerns. All initial evaluations are conducted at The Johns Hopkins Hospital.
Perhaps there is another way then to simulate the sexual relationships desired virtually. Could there be a way to change the perspective where the pedophile sees adults as their inner children and have the relationship with that ‘child’ instead of a physical one? Or perhaps flip the roles and have that person become their inner child in a relationship with a adult? Or a combination of both.
Good answers provided, so I won’t repeat. Just wanted to say that a young man, maybe in his earlier 20’s was stopped today by a policeman, and from what I gathered by briefly listening to their exchange, for “talking to a 14 year old girl”.
Pretty scary, talking to kids could get you arrested. Of course I don’t know the full details.
There are adult males who feel scared enough at this prospect.
There is an interesting habit of city governments, that I’ve noticed in many cities, of building their public parks right next to schools. I’ve lived in several cities with this layout. A lot of males, especially singles ones, feel they are endangering themselves of being at least harassed by police, for simply being present in such a park.
The only thing I can think of is that he’s a registered sex offender who’s required to stay away from young people? Or else he’s supposed to stay away from that particular girl.
A resource that is not available to everyone is equal amounts to begin with, and very interestingly, as someone who, presumably,exerts a degree of self-control every single day to maintain his weight, Jared Fogle was even more likely to lack sufficient self-control to apply to controlling his sexual behavior.
Well I was waiting for the light to change and cross the street. The gentleman was on a bike, and the cop was on a motorcycle. He asked him if he had a California ID (I live in Los Angeles), and the guy replied no. The cop asked him what he was saying to “that 14 year old girl”, and then I left.
Considering he was on a bike and ID, I doubt the cop knew he was a registered offender.
We don’t know what happened, and I did not witness anything other than that exchange. I just hope he was not stopped simply for “talking with a 14 year old girl without any proof of any intent of wrong doing”.
Another reason why many guys do not look after other people’s kids, for fear of being accused.
Just a bad situation all around.