(bolding mine)I’m sorry, but what does this mean?
It seems to have something to do with short circuits and loose wires, if I’m reading it correctly.
Were they not prosecuted for anything? What about incest. That would qualify in most states, I would think.
Bob
I don’t think fucking your stepdaughter counts as incest.
Apparently it is depending on where you are. Googling stepdaughter and incest was informative in so many ways… it seems to be a rather popular porn genre.
Anyway http://gawker.com/stepfather-and-adult-stepdaughter-charged-with-felony-i-1427093917
I just wanted to add that sometimes when I was picking up my son in elementary school I’d hear many of the Mom’s making little remarks about the boys which any man would have been in trouble for. Comments about their bodies mostly.
There seems to be a huge double standard going on, which isn’t surprising for such a morally repugnant concept. On the one hand, the criminal justice system is all about putting these people away in prison based on the theory that they chose their behavior and are fully responsible for it, yet they are then released onto probation or parole and into therapy programs that are based on the idea that the person is out of control and unable to help themselves unless they complete expensive and non-confidential mad leet treatment programz. If a person can’t control their behavior, they are legally insane and need treatment, not incarceration. If they can control their behavior, but (for whatever reason) choose not to, that is a criminal issue and we can throw away the key in good conscience.
Why does this double standard exist?
Which side is the most accurate? Do these people choose their behavior, or is this something that they can’t control?
Also, if the answer is that they cannot control their behavior, we should have sympathy for them, not repugnance. Why don’t we feel disgust at children with low IQ who disrupt classrooms by flapping their hands incessantly? Why don’t we go ahead and kill them so our own children can get a better education?
There is no double-standard here, just an excluded middle in your argument.
We recognize that some people have inapproriate desires towards children, and did not choose to have such desires.
However, they can choose what to do about it; whether to repress such desires / seek therapy or act on their impulses and commit an appalling crime.
A lot choose the former. Sadly, some choose the latter, and of course those people should be convicted as with any other serious crime (then maybe get therapy as part of their rehabilitation).
It’s exactly analogous to, say, anger management issues vs assault. We recognize some people are predisposed to violence, but it doesn’t excuse their actions, and we may send them to anger management classes / therapy as part of their rehabilitation.
The boys would have been about 8 or 9 years old, right? Just out of curiosity – did you ever say anything to the women about that?
No, what could I say? What could or would you to say if a grown woman says a little boy has a cute butt?
Well, let’s see–there’s several possibilities, from the serious, to the silly, to the sarcastic.
Possibility #1
I wonder what a cop would do if he heard you.
#2
Excuse me ma’am–have you ever heard the phrase “double standard”?
#3
Do you have a daughter that age? I’d like to invite her for a sleepover with me.
#4
I’ll loan you a camera, so you can get him naked and take his picture.
#5
Yeah, and that little girl beside him has sexy legs.
And so on.
Now, I’m not saying you should necessarily say anything. But there’s a whole bunch of stuff you could say, if you were minded to.
Yes – though all the while in fear that if they do seek counseling and help, it will end up badly for them, that it will get out and they’ll be branded anyway before a society where a large segment ipso facto wishes them dead. Unenviable position for those trying to do the right thing.
Yeah, I wish that our society could get past that attitude. Won’t be happening any time soon, I’m sure…
Right, I think if someone went to a counselor about such urges they would be required to be reported to police.
Its also the reason they cannot do studies on the issue.
this, exactly.
Are you sure that if someone who had never acted on their urges sought help from a psychiatrist they would be reported to the police? I’m pretty sure doctor-patient confidentiality prevents that.
This question gets asked a lot, and the assumption (for whatever reason) seems to be that there are no people who have urges but have never offended, and that such people are really uncaught child molesters who would need to be reported by a therapist if they were to seek a therapist. In other words, people reject the idea that a person with urges could resist them long enough to locate a therapist.
I’m not sure how you would even begin to design an experiment to determine what percentage of unconvicted persons with urges have never committed an offense (and which percentage are uncaught offenders), since you would need to, y’know, find out if they are actually guilty, which, by definition, has not been done.
Paedophilia is a form of sexual orientation that is natural within nature the reason that it is rightfully illegal is that it involves children who are in need of societies protection.
I personally prefer woman and there is no chance of me becoming gay as the chances of a gay man becoming straight is unlikely, sexual orientation is not an illness to be cured it is the way that we are wired, This is the reason why active paedophiles need to receive whole of life sentences they will always be a threat to children. Not all abusers are paedophiles some are rapists who need a victim to be terrified of them and at their mercy to get their sexual gratification, they do not care if their victim is male female of children they only want a victim they can dominate.
We need a global age of consent, 16 would be a logical age as you are not going to stop young teenagers experimenting, an addition of making it illegal for adults over the age of 18 to have sex with young people under the age of 18. The age of 12 and under should be set to determine acts of paedophilia. A global act will do away with any confusion and excuses and stop predator’s travelling to countries where there is no child protection
I think that is an unfounded assumption. People have urges that they don’t act upon, all the time. If everyone just did whatever popped into their head, we would never have formed any type of society / civilization to begin with. Most people, most of the time, can abide by a set of rules.
That is not true. Mandatory reporting laws vary by state, but they mandate reporting to the Department of Social Services or whatever the local child welfare agency is called, not the police. The purpose of mandatory reporting laws is not to make sure we “get” someone who abused a child, but to protect a child or children who are in danger of being abused. Generally, they require a mandated reporter to make a report when he “[suspects or has reason to believe that a child has been abused or neglected](https://www.childwelfare.gov/pubPDFs/manda.pdf#page=3&view=Standards for making a report).” Of course, by what standards exactly you should suspect or have reason to believe is open to interpretation, and some people, for fear of being prosecuted for failure to report if abuse is discovered by some other means, may be a bit overzealous and file a report if someone merely says “I’m attracted to kids.” But when you call DSS to make a report, their first question is not going to be “where’s the perp so we can go arrest him,” but “where’s the child so we can investigate whether he or she is in danger of being abused or neglected?” If you’re a therapist, and your patient is saying “I’ve never touched a kid in my life, but this attraction is tearing me up, and I’m here to get help with it,” and you believe him, there’s nothing to report.