A couple of points,the O.P. asked for opinions,I would imagine as some sort of a straw poll,so what would you have people do,lie when they answer?
Or if the answer is disagreebable to you NOT answer?
Thats not an opinion poll thats rubber stamping a predecided cosensus of an opinion that YOU hold.
If you wish to be all forgiving to childmolesters then thats your perogertive but you do not have any right to dictate to other people what opinions they should hold on any subject at all.
Though I’m sure that you’d still associate with me.
I’m sure that just as you have every right to post how you feel, he has every right to post what he thinks of your suggestion to beat someone’s head in. Like it or not, at least his opinion isn’t that we should violently kill someone for a past mistake, especially considering what types of pedophilia there are out there and the situations
Though I would agree that it would have been appropriately ironic if he had suggested you have your head beaten in because you seem like a violent sociopath
I don’t know all the pedophiles in the world, it’s true; but the ones I have known were a repugnant, unrepentant cluster of pus-bags. My real-world experience with pedophiles included no examples like the hypothetical kiddie-diddler. So, I repeat: Lust4Life gave the correct answer.
There sure is a lot of poking about in this thread trying to invent hypothetical situations in which whatever the pedophile did was not really that bad.
I just take the hypothetical as it stands in the ordinary meaning – an admitted pedophile who regrets what he has done. I do not take this to mean an admitted pedophile who has not done anything, or an admitted pedophile who has done something that he or she regrets but on an objective basis is not regrettable, or an admitted pedophile who in fact was not a pedophile in the common understanding of the term but instead is a young adult running afoul of staturory rape laws.
I don’t really know. There are so many things to consider. If I had knowledge that the person had done truly horrible things to children, then I don’t think I would ever be able to feel comfortable around them, regardless of them moving to a child-less area of Antarctica to be away from children.
I’m curious about the argument that one can not control who they are attracted to. While I don’t doubt the validity of this statement in and of itself, are sexual acts of an adult with a child about sex or are they about control?
I am not any kind of a therapist and have almost no formal education regarding psychiatry, but I always hear that rape is not about sexual attraction, that it is about the need to control and/or harm and/or humiliate another human being. So does the commission of a sex act on a child always happen because the adult has the hard-wired sexual desire for children? Does it ever just happen because some people are mean and violent and will do awful things to people? (I guess these questions can be applied to a lot of different criminal acts.)
I am just asking because I feel like a lot of people here are saying that pedophiles commit acts of sex abuse simply because they are unable to control their natural desires to have sex with children, and something about that just makes me really uncomfortable.
It means what it means to you, but the meaning you find in his regrets are not put there by me (the author of the hypothetical) or him (a fictional character).
I don’t recall the poll asking whether you would act like a vigilante and commit extralegal violence on the person in question. And yet that’s exactly what you and FriarTed advocated, demonstrating your sociopathic tendencies.
Never said i did. But choosing not to associate with a person is rather different from expressing a willingness to assault them.
But in your eyes I have made a mistake,I haven’t actually acted on my impulses(The character being hypothetical it would be impossible for me to do so) and as a result that doesn’t mean that ordinary decent non sociopathic people like yourself shouldn’t associate with myself.
Or at least if you are the least bit consistent in your argument that should be the case.(Dont worry I have no overwhelming desires to be your friend)
In actuality you seem to be bending over backwards to make excuses for Paedophiles whilst being absolutely condemnatory against those who disagree with you.
By the way I’d look up the meaning of Sociopath if I were you.
Also I totally stand by my statement that I think that Paedophiles are the lowest form of scum on this Earth.
You feel differently about them but that is your right to do so.
How exactly does treat a pedophile? I’ve always heard that it’s not something that can be fixed, pretty much the only thing they do is lock you up or make you take something to kill your sex drive.
In this case, they had daily sessions with therapists, weekly sessions with a psychologist, and spent a lot of time in “processing their feelings” and other such horseshit with the staff members like myself whose primary duties were supervisory. Such activities were mandated by therapeutic staff. I kept a log to verify that I was doing it. The mantra of the place was that we were supposed to maintain a therapeutic environment, not a punitive environment.
Now here’re the reasons I agree with Lust4Life:
I never once heard one of those pus-bags admit he had done anything wrong. Not one.
The only things I ever heard one of them express sorrow for was getting caught and locked up.
Their attitude towards their victims was particularly vile. It’s very hard not to start smashing skulls when you hear kiddie-diddlers blaming the very kids they molested.
As much as I needed the money, I first dropped back to being part-time and then quit altogether exactly because I couldn’t bear to be around those septic, feculent, pustulent, suppurating malignancies.
Later on, working as a deputy sheriff, I had further contact with the type while working court room security during trials and transporting prisoners. Nothing those pestilent vermin said or did gave me one bit of reason to change my mind about their type.
If the concepts here are too difficult for you, you should probably head off to a more simple conversation.
I’m not being condemnatory towards those who disagree with me. There are other people in this thread who have expressed an unwillingness to associate with the pedophile in the OP’s hypothetical, and i have made no condemnation of them. I specifically condemn people who would commit unprovoked violence against another person. And that’s what you said you’d do.
As i said, there are people in this thread who have expressed an unwillingness to associate with the person in the OP’s hypothetical.
In your case, i was not disagreeing with your desire not to associate with the person; i was merely pointing out the sanctimonious way you chose to express it.
If you don’t understand the difference, perhaps this whole issue is too complicated for you.
I can’t say. The “clients” who were outplaced were monitored by personnel from other agencies. If there was any recidivism, they’d have been placed in the prison system, not back in the treatment center. My gut feeling, based on daily observation of the clients, is that we taught them to “therapize*” and not much else.
*-“therapizing” is a term invented by a good friend of mine who has many years of experience as a social worker, special ed teacher, and residential treatment supervisor. Therapizing is something clients do. It means to spend a lot of time talking about one’s self, using as much jargon picked up from therapists and psychologists as one can remember. The overall goal of therapizing is to avoid chores or other things one doesn’t want to do. One can also therapize when one gets caught in an infraction of the institutions client rules. Then, therapizing serves the dual goal of delaying possible punishments and giving the staff the illusion that the client knows he did wrong and is trying to understand why he did it.