Challenor showing off their 'new' birth certificate

[MrsSnippyPants]

I will never accept this 'legal fiction, it is a travesty.

Maphobe?? Wtf?

Someone who is opposed to paedophilia? Being phobic? Well it certainly puts transphobe into context. I doubt that was the intention, though.

And four-year-olds know their own mind, including whether or not to go through puberty.

Sick.

Bespin, AC still volunteers for Prism a Coventry youth group, as well as Stonewall:

"Hi! I’m Aimee. I describe myself as a Equality Campaigner, a Public Speaker, and an Opinion Writer. I volunteer for Stonewall – the UK’s largest LGBT charity, and Prism LGBTQ – Coventry’s LGBTQ+ Youth Group. I write opinion articles for a number of websites, predominantly, the Huffington Post."

(from her website.)

Prism does not mention Aimee, but then they do not give any indication of who does run it, nor do they show their child protection policies on their website prismlgbtq.org/ normal practice for a youth organisation actively engaged in fundraising. (Lush please note.)

Bespin, would you be happy for your 13 year old to attend Prism, not knowing who runs it, and not knowing how they ensure minors in their care are safe.

Anyone with an understanding in assessing such risks will be able to see the difference in that.

Interesting.

So what risk would you say a man posed who said they fantasise about, are aroused by, and enjoy the thought of children being raped?

Would you, for instance employ him as a nursery school teacher?

bespin, I believe you you work with youth do you not?

So you must do these sort of risk assessments all the time.

Did you read it Bespin ? NK says he has never acted on it but admits to sexual fantasies including the kidnapping of kids and kids having sex with (being raped by) adults.

Having sexual fantastically like that makes him a paedophile. It does not make him a sex offender. However, if he or anyone possessed images or video showing science that are like his fantasies he would be classed as a sex offender.

You admit you are not aware of such profiles or of these tweets. Do keep up.

So, a man comes to you and says he's a paedophile, talks about underage girls, their panties, and masturbation habits. And would like to work with you and your youth group.

What would you write on the risk assessment?

(Sorry for the errors posted at speed and in a rage)

Science = scenes
Fantastical = fantasies

Yes I am a spelling and grammar snob but will admit to my mistakes when I make them.

personally my own field I would look to use an HCR 20 or ARMIDILO-s assessment to understand risk. the ARMIDILO is for ld or in relation to children the Aim 2. I would wish to look at both the static and dynamic risks involved with the person. or like you I could just make an assumptions based on a tweet.

If someone who you looked at made similar statements on a global public forum would this be a static or dynamic risk?

neither its a potenitl risk scenario, that you would need to assess the known risks against.

You'd be wise to take notice of a person tweeting/announcing on social media that they are a paedophile, and write down their paedophilic fanatasies, I think, bespin.

Call me old-fashioned.... but that sort of admission should be taken notice of.

What are the known risks?

"Also most trans people know that you can not change biological sex."

Bespin, If that is the case, then why does the birth certificate in this case state - Sex - Female?
If most trans people know that you can not change biological sex, then the birth certificate should have said - Sex - Male.

I really wish there is a gender critical person on this forum who actually understands the consept of the assessment of complex risk profiles who you will actually beleive to explain why althiugh it might appear the same the risks may not be there.

I am really not making this up just to make a point. a number of people I work with are labled because the public do not understand the actual risks from people who present like this.

Isn't that assessment for someone who has offended?

If he said to you I'm a paedophile, I talk to teenage girls about their masturbation habits, and fantasise about raping children.

What would you write on the assessment? How does that get 'translated' by you?

I mean, jeez, what does a person have to do? Short of having it tattooed on his forehead, he couldn't make it more clear that he's a paedophile.

Paedophiles - whether they've actually offended or not, should not be put in positions of responsibility or authority over children/minors. That should be safeguarding at the most basic level.

We're asking bespin!

Don't complain we don't know what we're talking about, when we're asking the questions and you are less than clear in your answers.

Bespin - just so I'm clear, are you saying that NK poses no risk and anyone making public comments on a global platform of the nature being discussed would not be deemed of any risk by you?

right the person as not called themselves a pedophile, strangly some people actually well do that. no those assessments can be used before someone as committed an offence though are usually used afterwards as thats when people are notified theres a problem. the person is making a very clear distinction between fantesy and reality and if they didn't that would be concerning. also they stated the person they didn't know was 13 only claimed to be, again you could look at that person's level of awareness around if they understood how that would be seen or how they saw it. none of these things can be assessed without an understanding of that person and there intent around there actions. if you really really want to understand this stuff there are a lot of articles on line that explain it far better than me.

Bespin, perhaps what you're trying to say is that on a scoring system a paedophile who had offended would score higher than a paedophile who just said they're a paedophile and they fantasise about raping children.

Which I'm sure everyone can understand.

My problem is you didn't understand the definition of the word paedophile, you thought that what that person had said online didn't seem to constitute being a paedophile, that people are not all over Twitter telling the general public that they are paedophiles, and that being able to change legal sex is a paedophiles dream.

And you appear to look down your nose upon women who are concerned over this.

no I am not saying that what I'm saying is that it is impossible to assess the actual risk of someone from a set of tweets unless they were a clear omission they are about to or have committed a crime.

if you really really want to understand this stuff there are a lot of articles on line that explain it far better than me.

I don't doubt it.

I find your defence of the wording of someone who repeatedly has said how they have done and thought immoral, questionable and unethical things, repugnant.

Do you also defend him saying that he would only have sex with someone who had a mature mind? As opposed to is over the age of consent? Since you defend the way he words things?

scoring system

is a very nieave way of looking at a dynamic assessment of risk and is in no way how these things are looked at on the whole there are tools that provide scores but that is not the assessment of risk they are often based on scenarios and trigger factors and potentials for risks to occur within them. management of such is around limiting scenarios that present risk and minimising triggers.

So if you can't assess the actual risk, does that mean you wouldn't apply a risk assessment to what they had said online?

I'm genuinely trying to understand what you would or wouldn't do.

If this man said he wanted to work with nursery children, and you are responsible for the risk assessment is what he said online something that you would have to take into account?

right I'm done, I'm not defending him I'm trying to explain how something that is vastly complex is not as simple as a tweet. I am defending the people I work with that are often victims of hate becuse they are seen to be different who have not committed offences and that can and are managed effectively in the community on a daily basis. you might want them all locked up but many of them have and will never commit an offence towards others.