AIBU to not want to socialise with someone convicted of sexual offences related to children?

[tomhardyonthewaltzers]

Am I losing my mind? because apparently I'm being unreasonable!.

A friends wedding is coming up. Invitation arrived ages ago and I accepted. I was really looking forward to it as would see lots of friends from Uni I haven't seen for years.

One of our old friendship group was several years ago convicted of making and distributing child abuse images. He got a suspended sentence. His GF was also part of our friendship group and she stuck by him. I cut contact with both of them.

A few years later he was caught again and jailed this time. GF found out she was pregnant just after he went inside. Again she stuck by him and they now have two children together and are still a couple but not living together since he was released.

They're both invited to the wedding which I only just found out. So I told friend who's getting married that I won't attend now because they're going.

So now I'm being pressured by the rest of the friendship group. Told that friend who's getting married is devastated, that her wedding won't be the same if I'm not there to watch her get married. Can't I just put my opinion aside for one day? That they don't want to see him either but wouldn't let the bride down. I was even called selfish!.

I CANNOT watch him laughing and joking at the reception or having a dance or whatever. I just can't watch him enjoy himself knowing what he's done and I am more angry with his partner really, although I know that's unfair but I just can't fathom her thought processes at all.

Would anyone on here be able to put it aside and go? I do feel guilty about letting my friend down and upsetting her and it seems like I'm the only one of our friendship group making this decision.

Needs, it's difficult to believe that characterising those she disagreed with as foaming, using gibberish and being hysterical constitutes trying to have an intelligent discussion.

There is no intelligent discussion in defending the indefensible

Given that SGB has made no secret of her experience working in the porn industry, a lack of knowledge on her part is surprising. But the point is that by the next post she has no excuse for that lack of knowledge as she could obtain it from reading the thread

Working in the porn industry as a consenting adult does not mean you know anything at all about images of child abuse or sentancing criteria or safeguarding or reading.

She could have fully read the thread she could not have done who knows.she could have read it until it descended into chaos then given up, she could have missed the incredibly informative well written posts that explained it well. Who knows.
She may just be a massive arsehole I don't know.

maddy

Trying to be factual despite having no actual facts is not always defending something.

So many threads on here about related topics for what ever reason often end up full of posters coming out with crap like "omg it's the pedo on every corner brigade" quickly followed by the "ranting hysteria brigade minimising" ones, ive never understood it myself but it happens a lot. And what usually follows is a bit of unintelligent rubbish that makes little sense to most people amd is usually not even accurate

That's just being a cunt not defending child abusers.

Bottom line is that the B & G have the right to invite whomsoever they choose. And the OP has the right to refuse to attend based on the attendance of another guest. In this case it's because a child sex criminal is attending. It could be that a married guest is bringing their paramour, they're a drug dealer, they go to the wrong church.

OP doesn't need to justify to anyone why she is not going. Her reasons for not attending are valid to her. They're valid to me, too, but that's irrelevant, really. Nor does she need to keep quiet about why she's refused the invitation.

If posters on here would have no compunction about associating or attending a function with a known sex offender, bully for you. I disagree with you because I feel that one of the problems with society is that we're too eager to accept people who have done certain things right back into society as if it were no big deal, let bygones be bygones. At one time people who committed certain acts were effectively banished from and shunned by society. I think it served as a great deterrent.

I can't believe what I have just read, some people on this thread are vile.

SGB works in porn. She openly alludes to this as she likes to come on now and then to remind us all how vanilla we are.

I can't accept that she was unaware that 'child porn' doesn't exist. She MUST know that it is child abuse, not 'porn.'
So either she was being the worst goady fucker ever, or she has an extremely sinister side to her character.
That's what bothered me so much about her disgusting post.

I'm surprised to see this thread still standing this morning.
OP I hope you haven't gone. Can completely understand your reasons for wanting to, though.

I was quite upset last night, I watched the thread go on for a little bit longer before going to bed. But felt like I should refrain from posting as anything I had to say would have been deleted.

I'm struggling to put in to words just how disturbing some posts have been. I get that this is AIBU and the OP asked a question. However, I honestly didn't believe that on a thread about a convicted child abuser, the response would be anything other than YANBU.

Some people said they would be able to go to the wedding, that's fine. Good for you. I would never knowingly spend time with a peadophile but everyone is different.

Some people are asking why the OP couldn't have lied to her friend so as not to 'cause drama'. That's insulting, why should she? It is nothing to do with 'moral outrage'. She had already accepted the invitation, then changed her mind after she found out he was going. I'm pretty sure the bride would've questioned why. Op's reason is a perfectly valid reason. It is nothing to be ashamed of. It is not something that shouldn't dare be uttered out loud. It is a pure fact. 'This man has been convicted twice and I do not wish to be in the same room with him'

I'm not even going to address the different levels of abuse comment again. Lest I end up getting told off.

This is obviously a very emotional subject and as such, I would have hoped that the people trying to make a point with their different wrong opinions would have been able to see that and think, maybe it's best to step away now. I've said my piece but perhaps this is not the thread to debate on. Regardless of whether the OP asked a question or not.

I cant agree any less with you MrsF. What you appear to be saying is that only people who agree with the OP's view should post an opinion. Despite the fact she is asking people to express an opinion. In AIBU of all places. And that anyone who says they could attend despite the circumstances are wrong. Well 'good for you' and all that. Fortunately, there is a breadth of opinion to be had.

If some images are acceptable, will you be volunteering your children for them? Totally unpalatable but the abused child is someone's baby.

who is that Q to Going?

windygales - I'm so sorry you have that situation in your life. I hope you have taken strength from this thread that you DON'T have to put up with it to keep the peace.

Where is MrsF saying that only the posts from people agreeing with the OP should be allowed to stand? Maybe she wrote it in invisible ink, and thus I can't see it.

I hope the thread stands. I actually think the child rape apologist posts should also stand, just so that people on MN don't forget that there are some sick people on the internet and some of them might very well be the people we joke with on another threads.

some more for the OP. You are doing absolutely the right thing.

Actually, onyerbike, what I am referring to is the posters who can't see how emotive this conversation is and think that their opinion trumps the fact that what they are saying is upsetting people. I like a good debate myself, but are you seriously telling me that csa is something to be debated about? Do you think that rather than just saying "yes, I would go but I can see how difficult it would be for some people" posters should be trying to justify their opinions by saying what he did might not have been that bad? You can't see the difference?

Hmmm..I think you're being pretty muddled-headed about this. The question asked wasn't about child abuse. People such as me who said they could go aren't doing so by saying 'well what he did wasn't so bad' at all. Down-loaders activities are vile and directly contribute to serious harm on an on-going basis.

So some people's opinions upsets others. Really? Well if that;s the case then those people upset should stop reading. On an open public platform.

Are you seriously suggesting the possibility some people could be upset should be a barrier to expression? Conversely to what you suggest, people's degree of 'upsetness' should not trump the expression of other people's opinion.

How can anyone be so thick to not realise that there is a victim, someone is harmed, when there is a picture of abuse becuase a child has been abused to make the picture happen. .

FFS kiddy fiddler was used as a term for many years. Kiddy sounds cute. It diluted the second part of the phrase. People were too stupid to think about what was being said. It was and is utterly offensive. Most people can get how terrible CSA is without having to be abused or have a child abused but it seems that some people can't.

Please show me where I've said all poster's who disagreed should be quiet. I've taken issue with the people trying to justify the behaviour. Not the people who have literally stated that they would go.

I would support you op. Being honest was the right thing to do.

When sex offenders are alowed to carry on as if nothing has happened, their friends and family minimising and ignoring what they've done, it sends a very clear message to two groups of people.

The first message is to other abusers. Those men see all around them that there are few social or legal consequences for abusers in our society. Most abusers don't get convicted (or even reported) and even for those that do, their family will likely brush it under the carpet.

The second message is to victims. Yes, there are lots of sex offenders walking among us, but there are also countless victims. Victims see abusers being welcomed, their lies being believed ("it was only a drawing, honest"). Victims see this and it directly impacts on how safe they feel, the amount of support they feel they would have if they reported. They see that even if they did report and get a conviction, plenty of people would still welcome their abuser with open arms.

Those aren't minor things. People who brush sex offences under the carpet are actively contributing to a society that helps abusers and harms victims. They aren't just passive bystanders, they are part of the problem.

last para of your post 6.55am. "This is obviously a very emotional subject and as such, I would have hoped that the people trying to make a point with their different wrong opinions would have been able to see that and think, maybe it's best to step away now."

Yes, the people trying to make a point is what I said. Not the people who said they would go

I don't want to name names because I will probably be 'personally attacking' them. But, if you've read the whole thread and you managed to read posts before they were deleted then you will know exactly who and what my issue is with. Please don't put words in to my mouth.

I don't think you were being that specific tbh - it's totally unclear that 'the people trying to make a point' was referring to the minimisers of abuse, not the potential attendees. Sorry, I assumed something else.

This thread is a bloody disgrace (not the op)
How MNHQ have "policed" this thread is woeful.
If child rape apologists are allowed to post in this way and when rightly told what their vile opinions are those posters are deleted.
Shame on you MNHQ and I wonder why parents would want to post on a site where SGB remains.

This thread is a goldmine for the twat list....

see Maddy, that is one of the most cowardly, goady and childish posts I've read for a long time.