Are paedophiles evil?

[amana1man]

Quote by: another day An underlying mental condition that causes sexual attration to children Exactly like I said. And like I said, if child molestation is about domination like rapists, then why do they amass huge amounts of child porn? Simple pictures of kids naked. How is that not coming from a sexual attraction? Of course it's not just sexual attraction, there are other reasons like everythign else, but there are no pedophiles that aren't sexually attracted to children, thats the main focus of their disease.

Pedophilia - sexual attraction to children as defined by dictionary.
Pedophilia: attraction to children which is often sexual and caused by a mental disorder as defined by medical book.

I know a man, he was a piano teacher in Des Moines Iowa. Little girls, Little boys, It made no difference. He gave the kids candy and the kids loved him. One day a little boy told his mother that the piano teacher touched his private parts. They sent the piano teacher to prison for years and he was "the boy" for many I am told. He was released in 1997 and returned to his home town. He had been out of prison less than a year when he commited a sexual act. I heard he was caught masturbated while fondling a child. The sick bastard shot himself and saved the tax payer some money. Yes it was sexual. The point is he was not driven by a sexual disire to commit this act. His brain was all screwed up and he wanted to do good things for the kids. When left alone with the child it turned sexual even though it was not something he had planned to do or even wanted to do. He could not control himself. This man had no pictures of naked children because for him their was no sexual attraction. He said when he was on trial in Des Moines that he loved the children and did not want to do bad things to them.

It is my feelings that many who you refer to with pictures of naked children are not pedophiles but in fact sexual predators and or sexual offenders. I also realize a pedophiles can be sexual predators and or sexual offenders if its children they have sexual attraction to.
To me the difference between pedophiles and sexual predators: A sexual predator plans to have sexual intercourse with a teen and knows it is wrong but does it anyhow.

[Marilyn Monroe]

Quote by: another day You know, alot of them are so deluded that they believe the children they molest truly love them. It's a mental disorder to the fullest, but that doesn't mean we should tolerate them.

How do you know this?

Some male homosexuals also like adolescent boys which is called hebephilia. I'm not speaking against homosexuals here, but they do have adolescent boys on the covers of some of their magazines.

I'm not so sure it's a mental disorder and not a perversion, and anybody can be perverted no matter the sexual orientation. Perversion is misuse.

The Catholic priests that got caught went to prison not a mental institution, and seems to me they were pedophiles.

Anybody can delude themselves to make it seem right. I believe OJ Simpson deluded himself as an example of delusion. It doesn't make you mentally ill.

As long as you know right from wrong you aren't mentally ill under the law, from what I've seen. They know what they are doing.

I can't believe you guys are trying to rationalize what a bad thing this is. Everybody can be mental in MHO. You have to learn self-control. Children are children for crissakes.

[amana1man]

In about 1985 my cousin, a dispatcher with a police dept. told me officers were sent to check out a party at a little farm near Jefferson City Missouri. It was reported that illegal actives were taking place. Police were told it had something to do with Chickens. They went prepared to arrest people for having a illegal cock fight. When they sneaked up and looked in they were appalled. They arrested several people for beastiality. This according to my cousin really did happen. Why were those men screwing chickens. Was their a underlying mental condition that caused sexual attraction to the chickens. No it was a bunch of drunk/high people having a wierd party.

Oh how does this relate to the question about pedophiles. Just pointing out that what was done surely was not done out of sexual disire. My cousin who knows quite a lot about pedophiles said once a pedophile, always a pedophile. She said they can not be healed by drugs. Its her belief that therapy works only as long as they are in therapy. I am not talking about some pervert who beholds the child as a sex object in the beginning. I am talking about those who first see the child as something else, be it a playmate, a friend he never had or perhaps a little sister. He just wants to befriend this child than later commits a heinous sexual crime. This fellow has a mental illness and needs help. The pervert who beholds the child as a sex object and commits a heinous sexual crime should get his just deserts. A eye for a eye, a tooth for a tooth.

[Marilyn Monroe]

Quote by: amana1man In about 1985 my cousin, a dispatcher with a police dept. told me officers were sent to check out a party at a little farm near Jefferson City Missouri. It was reported that illegal actives were taking place. Police were told it had something to do with Chickens. They went prepared to arrest people for having a illegal cock fight. When they sneaked up and looked in they were appalled. They arrested several people for beastiality. This according to my cousin really did happen. Why were those men screwing chickens. Was their a underlying mental condition that caused sexual attraction to the chickens. No it was a bunch of drunk/high people having a wierd party. Oh how does this relate to the question about pedophiles. Just pointing out that what was done surely was not done out of sexual disire. My cousin who knows quite a lot about pedophiles said once a pedophile, always a pedophile. She said they can not be healed by drugs. Its her belief that therapy works only as long as they are in therapy. I am not talking about some pervert who beholds the child as a sex object in the beginning. I am talking about those who first see the child as something else, be it a playmate, a friend he never had or perhaps a little sister. He just wants to befriend this child than later commits a heinous sexual crime. This fellow has a mental illness and needs help. The pervert who beholds the child as a sex object and commits a heinous sexual crime should get his just deserts. A eye for a eye, a tooth for a tooth.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophilia

[tman_ndsu08]

Quote by: Rave7pt0 Another Day, you are incorrect. Just as the large majority of rapists do not rape because of sexual desire, the large majority of pedofiles are not driven by sexuality, but an underlying mental disorder.

I don't think you're right in saying that their desire is not sexual.

Rapists get off on the fear they install in their victims. That is a sexual behavior.

Pedofiles get off on the knowledge that the person they're having sex with is young. That is a sexual behavior.

Both are disorders in the basis of nature (since neither behavior helps to reproduce).

[The Bacon Guy]

Okay, what are your thoughts on this.

Recently, the first man in Scotland was convicted over the online protection act. Apparently, this guy met a thirteen year old girl in an internet chatroom. After she told him she was interested in sex with him, they arranged to meet for sex. When he turned up at the location, it turned out the he had actually been talking to a police officer posing as a thirteen year old girl. He was arrested, charged under the online protection act and given 18 months in prison.

Leaving aside the fact that this is clearly police entrapment, do you think this was a just sentance for a man arranging to have sex with an underage girl, bearing in mind it was consensual and the girl clearly knew what she was agreeing to?

[Arawn-ap-Hywel]

Quote by: The Bacon Guy Obviously, Going out and raping a child is wrong. But if a person wakes up one morning to find he has these urges, does he automatically become evil in your view?

Quote by: The Bacon Guy Is the urge itself evil and if so, why?

Quote by: The Bacon Guy But is simply having this urge, through no fault of your own, unconditionally evil and should it warrant punishment and ostracism from society?

OK The Bacon Guy I misconstrued part of your point, thinking that you were making some attempt to align the paedophile with someone evil as in the religious sense of somehow aligned with satan or an expression of being a devil. The debate of someone or something being evil appears not to be your intent. Thus the simplistic view that because of some religious judgement these folks are dually warranted punishment as both acting illegally and as exponents of “evil”.

However The Bacon Guy you then state, reasonably

Quote by: The Bacon Guy I think this is an interesting point. If paedophilia is indeed to be considered a mental condition (it is listed in some psychological texts as a mental disorder), then I think it is even more important to try to understand these people rather than condemn them as evil or perverse. If it became a widely recognised condition, then it would be possible for these people to recieve treatments for it such as aversion therapy. As far as I know, these treatments do already exist but I feel the social stigma attached to paedophilia is so great, that very few paedophiles would take advantage of this. If the issue could be thought of as a psychological disorder, and society, particularly the media could be more understanding and less judgemental, more paedophiles would be willing to come forward and receive treatment rather than resorting to measures such as castration (ouch!). In my opinion, professional help for paedophiles would be a much more effective way of protecting childeren than media hysteria and condemnation.

thus showing a humane approach to these sad creatures. You allow them some release to seek treatment to encourage them as if they were alcoholics or drug addicts. You are seeking social allowance and tolerance for their acts or their possible acts. Yes their reason may come from the experiences of their youth; those who look for good reasons for a persons failure to act with care and compassion for their fellows, always give the benefit of some tinge of compassion to these aggressors. These people have no care other than for their own needs, self gratification and control is the only drive. As completely selfish creatures how are they going to motivate themselves sufficiently to consider themselves sick? I am more than happy for some scientist (not some psychologist trying to analyze or council them into being converted) to dabble with their brains and neurological functions in an attempt to reprogramme them. Though they would need very effective and foolproof control measures to ensure they are not fooled and success is 100%. Whilst media hype and parental intolerance greatly adds to mistrust in society, it is important that this sad ones are all caught and their presence in the world completely eradicated. Tolerance by society has been tried and it’s failure shows regularly. Those who cannot live by the codes of moral and human law should not be pitied. They can help themselves, it’s just their own weakness that is the problem, their uncaring lack of self discipline sets them apart. Thus they must remain apart, not for being evil but failing to be human, failing to show any spark of understanding that to hurt and terrorise a child is not under any circumstance acceptable.

Quote by: The Bacon Guy Okay, what are your thoughts on this. Recently, the first man in Scotland was convicted over the online protection act. Apparently, this guy met a thirteen year old girl in an internet chatroom. After she told him she was interested in sex with him, they arranged to meet for sex. When he turned up at the location, it turned out the he had actually been talking to a police officer posing as a thirteen year old girl. He was arrested, charged under the online protection act and given 18 months in prison. Leaving aside the fact that this is clearly police entrapment, do you think this was a just sentance for a man arranging to have sex with an underage girl, bearing in mind it was consensual and the girl clearly knew what she was agreeing to?

The Bacon Guy you clearly consider that because the 13 yearold gives her consent it is sufficient grounds to be lenient on a selfish predator? The sentence will (given Scottish prison system) most likely be reduced and he will be released to continue to pervert society. You do not mention if the sentence included a psychological profile, it should have.

Was it a just sentence

you ask. His captivity should be for as long as it takes for him to be “cured” (as mentioned previously by both of us; you albeitly in a much more liberal and humane fashion ) or until he dies!

[dreamer]

Quote by: The Bacon Guy childeren? Do we need to understand paedophiles rather than condemn them?

all children need protecting from nasty ways.

we all need to understand why such things happen.so such things do not happen in the future.

[Marilyn Monroe]

Quote by: The Bacon Guy Okay, what are your thoughts on this. Recently, the first man in Scotland was convicted over the online protection act. Apparently, this guy met a thirteen year old girl in an internet chatroom. After she told him she was interested in sex with him, they arranged to meet for sex. When he turned up at the location, it turned out the he had actually been talking to a police officer posing as a thirteen year old girl. He was arrested, charged under the online protection act and given 18 months in prison. Leaving aside the fact that this is clearly police entrapment, do you think this was a just sentance for a man arranging to have sex with an underage girl, bearing in mind it was consensual and the girl clearly knew what she was agreeing to?

How do you know the girl knew what she was agreeing to? Thirteen is still pretty young & dumb in my book. Kids 18 & 19 can be pretty dumb as well.

I don't like entrapment for prostitution, drugs, traffic violations, but when kids are involved, to me it's ok.

[amana1man]

Quote by: Marilyn Monroe http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophilia

What I read a medical journal, Pedophilia: an attraction to children which is often sexual and caused by a psychological disorder.
Thank you for the link. I have read most of the info in the link. I included some of what I read here. Anyhow pedophila is a psychological disorder which causes someone to be sexually attracted to a child.
From link, diagnosis of pedophilia: being sexually attracted primarily or exclusively to children for over a period of at least 6 months, recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors involving sexual activity with a prepubescent child or children (generally age 13 years or younger).
Going back to the medical journal "is often sexual" and now link "and not all pedophiles sexually molest children." It would appear the Jourrnal is saying "not all pedophiles act opon the sexual urges but neverless they are pedophiles because they have these urges."


Use of the term pedophile to describe all child sexual offenders is seen as problematic by some people, especially when viewed from a medical standpoint, as the majority of sex crimes against children are perpetrated by situational offenders rather than people sexually preferring prepubertal children.[

Pedophilia is itself neither a crime nor a legal term. It does not describe behavior, but a psychological disorder. Those who have committed sexual crimes against children, but do not meet the normal diagnosis criteria for pedophilia, are referred to as situational or regressed offenders, whereas offenders primarily attracted toward children are called structured, preferential, or fixated pedophiles, as their orientation is fixed by the structure of their personality. It is estimated that only 2 to 10 percent of child sexual abuse perpetrators meet the regular criteria for pedophilia.

A number of proposed treatment techniques for pedophilia have been developed. Many regard pedophilia as highly resistant to psychological interference and have dismissed as ineffective most "reparative strategies.
Anti-androgenic medications such as Depo Provera may be used to lower testosterone levels, and are often used in conjunction with other approaches.
More favoured is cognitive-behavioral therapy, in which the subject is taught to associate "pedophilic behavior" with various unpleasantries.

Now I know why my cousin said once a pedophile always a pedophile.

[The Bacon Guy]

How do you know the girl knew what she was agreeing to?

I think it would have to have been a pretty clear agreement to sex for the police to get a succesful conviction out of it. So, if the man wasn't decieving or misleading the girl in any way, is it really a child protection issue? This hypothetical girl clearly wanted to have sex with him, so it's not as if the man is a menace to society, preying on innocent girls. If this is the case, and it was simply two people who wanted to have sex, does society really need protecting from this man?

With regards to the entrapment issue, I said "leaving aside", precisely for the reason that I didn't want to start up an "Unethical-poice-conduct-is-ok-if-it-gets-the-job-done" debate.

[Kite]

It really doesn't matter who asked what in the eyes of the law. It is the simple fact that the man agreed to have sex with an underage girl, when he knew that she was underage. It doesn't matter who initates, he still agreed when he knew it was wrong. However, I see where you are coming from with the entrapment part. It would take a considerable amount of...balls, for the lack of a better term, to ask the girl to have sex. However, if the girl initates the dialog, it makes it that much easier for the guy to be lured in. Still, it was wrong for him to agree, and that is why he is in the wrong.

[another day]

Quote by: amana1man I know a man, he was a piano teacher in Des Moines Iowa. Little girls, Little boys, It made no difference. He gave the kids candy and the kids loved him. One day a little boy told his mother that the piano teacher touched his private parts. They sent the piano teacher to prison for years and he was "the boy" for many I am told. He was released in 1997 and returned to his home town. He had been out of prison less than a year when he commited a sexual act. I heard he was caught masturbated while fondling a child. The sick bastard shot himself and saved the tax payer some money. Yes it was sexual. The point is he was not driven by a sexual disire to commit this act. His brain was all screwed up and he wanted to do good things for the kids. When left alone with the child it turned sexual even though it was not something he had planned to do or even wanted to do. He could not control himself. This man had no pictures of naked children because for him their was no sexual attraction. He said when he was on trial in Des Moines that he loved the children and did not want to do bad things to them. It is my feelings that many who you refer to with pictures of naked children are not pedophiles but in fact sexual predators and or sexual offenders. I also realize a pedophiles can be sexual predators and or sexual offenders if its children they have sexual attraction to. To me the difference between pedophiles and sexual predators: A sexual predator plans to have sexual intercourse with a teen and knows it is wrong but does it anyhow.

This is ridiculous.

1.) You sure know an awful lot about the deepest workings of that mans mind. Bullshit. He was a pedophile, and his desires were SEXUAL, which were why he acted out in a SEXUAL way on the child. Whether he was consciously aware of it or not, the sexual desire was clearly still there in his subconscious whether he wanted to accept it or not. If "he could not help himself" from making sexual contact with the child then it was sexual desire that drove his attraction to children, like almost every other damn pedophile. Like you said, he did not plan it, and could not control it. This obviously doesn't mean the sexual attraction wasn't there, it means he had buried it deep in his mind and did not want to acknoledge it, making himself think that he simply loved children and this was why he was attracted to them. Low and behold, he made sexual contact. You'll have to try harder then that.

2.) So people who are addicted to child porn are not pedophiles? That is fucking lunatic. Straight up. If anything it would be the other way around. People who molest children are the sexual predators, seeking dominance and control over the child (albeit in a sexually driven way), people who look at child porn are the pedophiles, seeking sexual stimulation from the young children they are naturally attracted to. But thats not right either because you can easily be a pedophile and a sexual predator at the same time, and countless men ARE.

Do you think peadophiles get cancer? They're flesh and blood like the rest of us, they can get cancer too y'know, to judge a pedo would be to judge any other man (who could also get cancer), as we are all the same, some people like there girls a little younger, all of us can get cancer

[Scribbler1]

Wtf?

[Athena]

Quote by: amana1man What I read a medical journal, Pedophilia: an attraction to children which is often sexual and caused by a psychological disorder. Thank you for the link. I have read most of the info in the link. I included some of what I read here. Anyhow pedophila is a psychological disorder which causes someone to be sexually attracted to a child. From link, diagnosis of pedophilia: being sexually attracted primarily or exclusively to children for over a period of at least 6 months, recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors involving sexual activity with a prepubescent child or children (generally age 13 years or younger). Going back to the medical journal "is often sexual" and now link "and not all pedophiles sexually molest children." It would appear the Jourrnal is saying "not all pedophiles act opon the sexual urges but neverless they are pedophiles because they have these urges." Use of the term pedophile to describe all child sexual offenders is seen as problematic by some people, especially when viewed from a medical standpoint, as the majority of sex crimes against children are perpetrated by situational offenders rather than people sexually preferring prepubertal children.[ Pedophilia is itself neither a crime nor a legal term. It does not describe behavior, but a psychological disorder. Those who have committed sexual crimes against children, but do not meet the normal diagnosis criteria for pedophilia, are referred to as situational or regressed offenders, whereas offenders primarily attracted toward children are called structured, preferential, or fixated pedophiles, as their orientation is fixed by the structure of their personality. It is estimated that only 2 to 10 percent of child sexual abuse perpetrators meet the regular criteria for pedophilia. A number of proposed treatment techniques for pedophilia have been developed. Many regard pedophilia as highly resistant to psychological interference and have dismissed as ineffective most "reparative strategies. Anti-androgenic medications such as Depo Provera may be used to lower testosterone levels, and are often used in conjunction with other approaches. More favoured is cognitive-behavioral therapy, in which the subject is taught to associate "pedophilic behavior" with various unpleasantries. Now I know why my cousin said once a pedophile always a pedophile.

Aplause, aplause, that was a great explanation!

I think the US has gone way over broad with its negative reaction to sex! I was shocked when I learn some people see children as sexually attractive, but when young people become sexually interested than I think they also need take responsibility. That is when a 14 year girl is deliberately using sex to get attention, I don't think we should call the male or female a pedophile for responding. I would make this against the law, because of all the things involved, but I would label the person and make it a prison term and require this person to register as a sex offender the first time. This is to apt to be a situational thing, and reaction a person could regret when stepping back and giving it some thought.

I question the degree of harm done too. There are cases where a little girl is torn up inside because of a male penetrated her when she was too small. I would make this a big crime! But when this is a sexually agreessive teenager, and no physical damage is done, exactly what is the harm? What? In France it is okay for older women and boys to have sex, and in the US it is a crime. I wondering if it is really necessary to make this a crime? With girls I can see a difference, because of our double standard. Also they get pregnant so I really don't want them to be sexually active at a young age.

Ideally no one has sex until they are 30 years old, have held a job for awhile and are buying a home. :) Okay, that is unrealistic, but criminalize sex is a bit extreme.

[Athena]

Quote by: another day This is ridiculous. 1.) You sure know an awful lot about the deepest workings of that mans mind. Bullshit. He was a pedophile, and his desires were SEXUAL, which were why he acted out in a SEXUAL way on the child. Whether he was consciously aware of it or not, the sexual desire was clearly still there in his subconscious whether he wanted to accept it or not. If "he could not help himself" from making sexual contact with the child then it was sexual desire that drove his attraction to children, like almost every other damn pedophile. Like you said, he did not plan it, and could not control it. This obviously doesn't mean the sexual attraction wasn't there, it means he had buried it deep in his mind and did not want to acknoledge it, making himself think that he simply loved children and this was why he was attracted to them. Low and behold, he made sexual contact. You'll have to try harder then that. 2.) So people who are addicted to child porn are not pedophiles? That is fucking lunatic. Straight up. If anything it would be the other way around. People who molest children are the sexual predators, seeking dominance and control over the child (albeit in a sexually driven way), people who look at child porn are the pedophiles, seeking sexual stimulation from the young children they are naturally attracted to. But thats not right either because you can easily be a pedophile and a sexual predator at the same time, and countless men ARE.

another day, there but for the grace of God, go you. You could be that pedophile. Our sexual responses are the result of imprinting and this imprinting will not go away just because a person wants it to. That is why the man shoot himself. I feel terribly sad for him, and I am as concerned about your lack of sympathy as would be concerned about pedophiliac, because both are having an emotional reaction that excludes the consciousness of another's expereince and appropriate compassion.

He didn't want to be as he was, but actually hated himself for it. How sad. He could not change it. Something happened to him that imprinted this sexual behavior in him, and the same could have happened to you. I guess you were lucky because it appears it didn't happen to you.

Why are we so hard on each other because of our sexuality, especially when it is different? I am remind of the wolves that can turn on an injured wolve and kill it. I think this extreme intolerance for differences, must be a primitive instinct. It clearly is not judgement based on information about our sexuality.

[another day]

Athena: Maybe you misinterpreted my post as it was full of strong language, but I wasn't lashing out at pedophiles at all. That wasn't what I was talking about. I was addressing his claims that pedophiles cannot molest children willingly and that only "sexual predators" do that.

Going back to the medical journal "is often sexual" and now link "and not all pedophiles sexually molest children." It would appear the Jourrnal is saying "not all pedophiles act opon the sexual urges but neverless they are pedophiles because they have these urges."

Exactly what I was saying all along. A pedophile is one who is sexually attracted to children. I never said a pedophile HAD to molest children to be a pedophile, I said he had to be sexually attracted to children. You cannot be a pedophile without being sexually attracted to children. It is true that sexual attraction is not the WHOLE CAUSE. The person can be like the man you told the story about, and just really love children for their innocence and joy and whatnot, but in the end, as in the case of your story, it is sexual desire that is driving their obsession. Do you think a psychologist would class a kindergarten teacher who just loves working with kids as a pedophile without evidence of sexual attraction? Of course not...Now Think of your attraction to the opposite sex (or the same sex if your gay)...Are there not things that attract you to them that are not overtly sexual? Of course there are...but in the end it is the same thing, sexual desire that is motivating these attractions. It is not plutonic.

[Mia]

Quote by: The Bacon Guy Okay, what are your thoughts on this. Recently, the first man in Scotland was convicted over the online protection act. Apparently, this guy met a thirteen year old girl in an internet chatroom. After she told him she was interested in sex with him, they arranged to meet for sex. When he turned up at the location, it turned out the he had actually been talking to a police officer posing as a thirteen year old girl. He was arrested, charged under the online protection act and given 18 months in prison. Leaving aside the fact that this is clearly police entrapment, do you think this was a just sentance for a man arranging to have sex with an underage girl, bearing in mind it was consensual and the girl clearly knew what she was agreeing to?

A 13 year old is far below the age that she can legally give consent. What would you wish the sentance to be if was your 13 year old daughter?

[Mia]

Quote by: Scribbler1 Wtf?

Sexual urges lead to cancer.