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?

"How anyone can think that being a paedophile means that you sexually abuse children is what I can't understand. That's like saying just because she's gay it means she wants to have sex with all women. It's just stupid. The definition of paedophile means they find children sexually attractive."

This is just wrong.
Inaccurate, dangerous and scary thought process.

And by the way, SamraLee if a pedophile "only" indulges in imagery/videos/pictures he or she is already participating in child abuse.

That is the only difference between their difference from the norm and those who have say Gerontophilia (sexual attraction to elderly people), Menophilia (sexual attraction to menstruation) or a thousand other known deviations from the human norm of sexual attraction.

The difference is that all those other 'deviations' can likely be satisfied by another fully consenting adult.

If someone is of a particular orientation then it is fair to say that the chances are high that they will act on this in some way or other even if it is just images.

poppy the definition of paedophilia IS finding pre-pubescent children sexually attractive.

And it is very far from true that everyone with paedophilia will act on it.

hully I thought the whole point of CBT is to retrain your brain. There are lots of things you can train yourself to like or hate against your initial preference. No doubt you could also 'cure' yourself of heterosexuality if you tried long enough.

And yes it is always going to be difficult to take the full glorious range of human sexual behaviour and split into neat boxes labelled 'fine', 'unusual but fine', and 'needs curing' but sometimes peoples natures are incompatible with allowing others freedom to live their lives free from fear and abuse. So something has to give.

If you give a criminal paedophile the choice of changing their nature or staying in prison for ever then they can choose whichever is the lesser of two evils for them. This is the price of a civilized society...it cannot be equal freedom for all.

baby Are you repeating me for some reason? I said the difference is we cannot allow them to indulge on the previous line to the one you quote?

Is it reasonable to say that people are generally at the mercy of their sexual desires?

That people in general satisfy them without thought for the consequences?

Do you have a one night stand every time you feel attracted to someone? Or do you give thought to the consequences to your marriage?

Bringing priests into this might not be a good move but the vast majority of celibate priest actually manage it and presumably they still have desire?

In the days when homosexuality was criminalized many many people will have been operating against their desires.

So is it really so obvious that we are slaves to our sexual desires in general?

I don't think CBT would cut it, it wouldn't even start it.

And they've made really really sterling efforts to cure people of homosexuality...including electroshock, aversion therapy etc etc

Ain't none of it worked.

Haven't read all this thread but the Lucy Faithfull foundation offer services to help people who are sexually attracted to children avoid offending. See www.stopitnow.org.uk

No one is saying a paedophile will see all children as a target....

However as I've said, if someone is of a particular orientation then it is fair to say that the chances are high that they will act on this in some way or other even if it is just images.

I am not sure CBT would work alone to cure someone but it may help those who want to manage their feelings, stop them obsessing so much, understand themselves (along with other therapy) and hopefully not act on their desire. This would be for those who want to change. Of course you will get those who do not want to and will hide behind wanting to but some will and surely we need to treat them as humans not animals

I thought it was widely established and accepted by medical professionals that pedophilia can not be 'cured' so this 'rehabilitation' you are talking about is nonsense.

I remember watching Louis Theroux in an American prison/centre for sex offenders, some where refusing treatment and saw nothing wrong, they were waiting for society to change their views and accept that children had a choice and were able to decide to be in a relationship etc, others who were accepting treatment still ended up excusing away their perversions.
I honestly would put my life on the line and bet that there is no paedophile in the world who hasn't looked at child pornography or committed a crime.

hully ahh...but we don't need to cure them of paedophilia only cure them of acting on it.

So maybe you can't 'cure' someone of homosexual desire but millions of people have demonstrated that it is possible to live without gratifying that desire.

There have been trials that demonstrated that criminal paedophiles had been 'cured' of offending even if they hadn't been 'cured' of the desire.

And surely that is what we really want?

Perhaps ICBINEG you should read some of the threads on here written by survivors of abuse. Maybe you should ask them what they think of this Hug A Paedophile idea.

OTT well if you define paedophile as someone who is so powerfully and exclusively tied to sexual desire in children that they are bound to offend then you are no doubt right...

But what of the spectrum? There must be people without raving libedos who are paedophilic? There must be people who like people of all ages (an equivalent to bisexuality perhaps)? And there are genuine cases of people pleading for help to prevent themselves from hurting anyone.

So I really wouldn't put your life on the line.

ballina I should imagine their number one priority would be the prevention of further abuse of children....

So If hug- a paedophile as you call it prevents the most abuse I would hope they would back it.

I wouldn't speak for victims if I were you. They often have a less revenge oriented approach then the professional appalled bystanders.

What trials? Evidence please!

that should read professionally appalled bystanders

I'm finding it absolutely astonishing that there are people out there who think you can "cure" a person of their "preference".

I find it very hard to believe that many paedophiles don't act on their feelings. It's like a crush. When you lust after someone you will try to find as much as possible about that person. Try to find pictures and have sexual fantasies about them. This is all normal in human nature. What's scary is that these people lust after children. If you think it's okay for them to have the desire, then I am sickened. I don't want my children being an object of desire. No parent does.

They often have a less revenge oriented approach

Not me, lock them up throw away the key.

It is one of the most basic human curiosities to indulge in sexual pleasures, be it from imagination, images, video or physical contact.

I would bet my life on it, I am that sure.

But I do speak for victims. For the hundreds of trafficked children I help in my profession. I find your views grossly offensive, as I would imagine each of those children would.

If allowing abusers or potential abusers to normalise their thoughts without condemnation is the answer, you are asking the wrong question.

Professionaly appalled bystanders? ICBINEG WTAF?!

Argh thanks...looking for trial papers and have discovered that incest doesn't officially count as paedophilia...

I really don't want to be thinking about these things...

ballina honestly if you find the opinion that we do whatever the fuck it takes to stop people offending against children up to an including giving them a gold plated medal then I don't know what to say.

Surely keeping children safe is more important than indulging in labelling and revenge?