to be pretty terrified that being a child abuser

[FocaultOff]

has actually caused some people to rise to positions of power only because Parliament's power has been corrupted absolutely:

spotlightonabuse.wordpress.com/2013/05/11/the-dirt-book-how-the-sexual-abuse-of-children-is-used-for-political-gain/

Following the developments of Savile, I continue to be shocked, saddened and horirified on a daily basis - I just cannot get over the depths of this and how far up and nationally this goes. WTF is going on? It took Portugal 7 years to sort out the Casa Pia orphanages abuse network with their very own Savile TV type figure involved. I cannot give a shiny shit about EU referendums and Nigel Horsey Mirage while we now know all this....2015 election has no other issues surely? So long as any party is protecting alleged child abusers within their ranks and preventing due process of criminal justice system being applied to them for a court to find innocent or guilty, as with all other subjects of the law, none shall be above it, then they cannot have be entrusted with power.... how do we know child abusers aren't influencing sentencing guidelines for child sex abuse offences for example? spotlightonabuse.wordpress.com/2013/05/13/the-sentencing-council-and-other-legal-panels-took-advice-from-convicted-paedophiles-about-sentencing-for-paedophile-offences/

Am I being crazy to think people would be shouting from rooftops about this if they knew, or does everyone already know and just accept this is the way it is? Not paedo hating public hysteria....I'm a pacificst and I want to see democracy fixed so more like a very severe public Paxmanesque probing on National TV for some of those in charge of the various child abuse inquiries that have thus far been unable to provide proper resolution over the question of abusers in power and children in care being trafficked round the country to be sexually exploited? Why is at the very least this not happening?

Oh my word. Not ONE single person on this thread has said paedophilia is acceptable, not ONE single person has apologised for them.

I'm really sorry but paedophilia is considered a sexual orientation. A deviant one of course but using that definition is NOT apologising for them or being some bleeding heart liberal and I won't be lumped into that category through other's lack of comprehension.

I do realise people have directly spoken to me on this thread but it's moved on so much since I was on it yesterday it feels rather pointless to answer now, so apologies :)

If you are suggesting that shaving your legs equates desiring children ICBINEG, frankly you are having a giraffe.

I can only speak for myself - I have never tried to make myself look pre-pubescent.

I have no fixed views on the ability to control sexual desire/orientation. But I do believe that the desire, whether controllable or not, is fundamentally wrong.

polka I have no words...particularly that the court system failed you...that is beyond terrible. I really REALLY hope this current coverage marks a real change in the way the courts deal with these cases...I really hope it isn't the patch it up job that it looks like.

He was later convicted for multiple offences, just seems sad some may have been prevented if better work was done on my case. I wouldn't really stab him obviously, but I definitely believe that it's the planning and execution of abuse (or watching of child porn etc) that is the crime and is inherently wrong, not the desire.

bump it is abnormal...on that much I agree.

I am saying that shaving you legs is an attempt to make yourself look more sexually attractive by making yourself look more child like. Society promotes the prepubescent form as being more desirable than the adult female form. Why else would we be shaving off hair that is natural? Why would we be bombarded with images of supermodels with 'boy like' figures. Why are super pert small boobs more attractive than post childbirth low slung boulders?

Societies whole picture of sexual attractiveness is swung way to far to the prepubescent for comfort.

What I am saying is that if you conform to those ideals you are adding to the problem rather than solving it.

polka I just can't imagine finding out he had done something more after you had gone to court. Truly dreadful.

Do you think things are genuinely changing for the better at the moment?

It is also a very good point you make that people differ in their responses and opinions even amongst those who have explicitly been abused.

Because ICBINEG it involves sexually violating innocent and vulnerable children?

I don't shave my legs to look childlike!

I suspect not many women do.

Things are better in that the support given is much better and more focused than when it happened to me. I don't work in the law field so can't really speak with any authority on whether that is improving, but from the outside looking in it does appear so, something is better than nothing, but it'll need tweaking for a long time to come.

I don't think it is going to be possible to have a reasoned, productive debate about this on a parenting website

I'd argue that it's difficult for anyone to have a reasoned debate about pedophilia.
The knee jerk reaction of revulsion is very close to the surface and hard to suppress.
I'd also suggest that many people feel as if discussing it in a matter of fact way is somehow tantamount to condoning pedophilia?

As if not express your disgust & horror frequently means you dont feel disgust & horror

I speak as someone who was abused as a small child.

They were talking about their experiences with the paedophiles they counselled and they said that each one could look at a playground full of kids and would instantly pick out the ones they would target as the loneliest quietest kids - the ones who would never tell.

Isnt this just the mark of a successful predator? be it a con artist, sexual predator or whatever, the instinct for spotting and exploiting a weakness

Re Graham Ovenden - apparently Lord Macalpine possessed a large collection of his Art and sold it in 1996.

bump then why do you shave them? Assuming you do...

polka That sounds better than I was thinking...I am also utterly outside this looking in. I guess it really will be impossible to go back to thinking that children are making a lifestyle choice to be abused....although I can't imagine it being possible to think that in the first place. I just worry that there will be a big flurry and then a slow slide back...or that someone will decide that only asian and not white men behave this way or something equally ridiculous.

Well hopefully this really is moving forward.

Because I associate it with hygiene and femininity. So do all the women I know.

Ryanboy

UK SOCIETY HAS TRIED MASTURBATION SATIATION FOR THE PAST 20 YEARS IN OUR TREATMENT OF PAEDOPHILES. IT TURNS OUT THE MAN WHO ADVISED THAT WAS A PAEDOPHILE AND PROFITED FROM BRINGING CHILD ABUSE IMAGES INTO HIS TREATMENT CENTRES.

In turn, that man, Ray Wyre, encouraged and brought along many child abusers that passed through his doors, sending them back out into the world hyped and justified to rape and abuse many more children between them.

sand when I see pictures of convicted paedophiles my skin crawls and I feel sick. It is that visceral. But I have been accused of being an apologist aiming to normalise the abuse of children on this thread.

I really would like to know what leads to us thinking someone who molests a child is more evil and disgusting than someone who simply murders a child without sexual motivation. Surely murder is the more serious crime? The courts certainly treat it as such...

Who would you rather have living next door: someone who beat a toddler to death or someone who was jailed for having indecent images of children on their computer?

What is it about the inclusion of sexual desire in the mix that makes it so much more stomach churning?

Certainly the revulsion is disproportionate in the case of paedophiles that have never offended or abused anyone.

I think a lot of these arguments come from a place full of good intentions, but ultimately uninformed and very naive.

It's a very complicated pathology, with a wide spectrum and there has been an ongoing effort to treat/support people with this condition. Those efforts have been largely well documented and there's very little cause for optimism when it comes to success rates.

As a society, we need to draw the line at behaviours so heinous that potential offenders will know without a shadow of a doubt that any trespass will be met with the full force of the law, heavy custodial sentences and alienation from society.

leg shaving..because I don't want various random dark thick hairs sticking out anywhere, or rather so i don't look like a man and look feminine.

Most women I know want to look fit and healthy with a nice shape and breasts. I don't know anyone who wants to be shapeless with no tits.

Models are chosen because they are tall and skinny and clothes hang better on them

bump yeah but you know that is bollocks don't you? I mean the normal appearance of an adult female includes leg hair...so how can you be MORE feminine if you remove it?

Hygiene? I have never EVER heard anyone say they think leg hair is dirty. That is a new one...I mean obviously it isn't. How would it even GET dirty? That's just mad.

Face it! People remove leg hair because society deems women with hairless legs to be more attractive than women with hairy legs. End of.

Similarly society deems women with hairless armpits to be more attractive than those with hairy, and is well on the way to deeming women with hariless fanjos more attractive than women with hairy fanjos...oh and women with prepubescent looking labia are more attractive then those with classic post pubescent looking labia.

At the end of the day society is deeming that the prepubescent appearance of females is more sexually attractive than the post pubescent appearance.

What do you think you can possibly be doing when you remove your pubic hair but attempting to appear prepubescent? It is sort of the definition.....

What is it about the inclusion of sexual desire in the mix that makes it so much more stomach churning?

ICB, I suppose the answer is in the question, for whatever reason, we treat sex as something in a category of it's own.

Perhaps it's that something about sexual desires and urges is especially resistant to reason and rationality, so it seems especially dangerous and in need of control & regulation?

Two thirds of people who sexually abuse children are not paedophiles. They sexually abuse children for other reasons.

The issue of paedophilia is that they believe they can have a mutually beneficial relationship with a child. That is clearly a delusion and is treated with CBT. It doesn't cure them of the desire, but it gets rid of the moral justification that exists in their mind for their actions. Public stigma towards paedophilia is no doubt useful in reinforcing to paedophiles that is it a delusion and has no moral justification.

Research has shown that most adult men find fourteen year old females attractive, but the vast majority of them don't act on this because they are aware that it is not possible to have a mutually beneficial sexual relationship with a fourteen year old. We don't sit around sympathising with them or getting them to be open about their 'orientation.' They are expected to act as responsible adults. The same is true for paedophiles (those attracted to pre pubescent children) - get therapy for the delusion that acting on a desire is acceptable, not for the desire itself. The fact somebody is attracted to children does not need to be accepted and discussed in wider society. There's nothing special about believing your desires are more important than somebody else's capability to consent - all sexual predators believe that.

Excellent post, Freya.

yy excellent post freya.

I don't get the thing about " two thirds of people who abuse children are not peadophiles".
How can that be?
In order to do it, wouldn't you have to have that desire??
I like your post though Freya.