Trans professor is placed on leave after interview defending pedophiles

[PandorasMailbox]

Oh dear, how very sad.

Don't let them back in!

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10210713/Trans-professor-placed-leave-controversially-defending-pedophiles.html#comments

I think there are myriad reasons why men become attracted to children and I'm not sure there's a huge amount of research on that. Some of them are into the power thing, some of them are stunted emotionally and can't connect with other adults, others find the purity and innocence arousing. Some of them enjoy inflicting pain.

But what struck me from reading AW's thesis (and I hope @YetAnotherSpartacus comes back and reads my post) is that as far as I can tell, pretty much all the 40 men she spoke to would abuse children if they could convince themselves it was consensual

@BloodinGutters
Thinking it through I don't believe that all men who have been sexually abusive the dc towards under the age of consent will be actively abusive as a constant.

I do believe that any individual who has been abusive in the past and I would include the viewing of indecent images has the potential capacity to be so again in the future and safeguarding should recognize this.

I think some men are very focused on sexually abusing children and others are very opportunistic with little if any consideration given before hand. They pose different sorts of risks and need different management strategies.

For some men chasing down new indecent images of children is an obsession that they continually act on. There are other men who download a couple of images and then delete them.
Both of these groups have committed sexual offenses against children but one is not continually reoffending.

In general I'm inclined to think that their lips are moving they must be lying is a useful maxim for listening to sex offenders but I still think there is a continuum.

@CheeseMmmm

Ok so turn it around.

Time and time again paedophiles who say they would never hurt a child turn out to have done just that. Paedophiles are well known for being extremely manipulative. Winning trust. Charming/ sincere. Lovely men. Etc.

Most people are just not that good at acting or natural manipulators.

So turn it around.

Instead of men who are sexually attracted to young children somehow all being rapists by definition.

How about some rapists find young children their main or total preference because of things like. Innocent- way easy to groom if you know how. Vulnerable. Can be abused on long term basis more easily. Can be manipulated into thinking that the abuser loves them. Feeling of power and superiority from being able often to pull the wool over eyes of those who want to protect them , parents etc.

If that makes sense then it starts to sound like a personality disorder and a particularly terrible one.

Any thoughts on that?

Personality disorders are the extreme end of a spectrum of traits that are evident within the general population, at a lesser degree, and are healthy in the general population when in balance with other traits.

Personality disorders are one extreme of these traits that is very unhealthy. The other extreme is often very unhealthy also. Like npd at one end of a spectrum and complete passivity at the other end, the in between balance is that most of us have a certain amount of narcissism and in balance with the ability to not trample others with it and the skills to reflect and be self aware, that small amount of narcissism is healthy and normal. The extremes of npd and complete passivity are extremely unhealthy.

Experiencing sexual release to thoughts or images or actual rape of children is not a spectrum. There’s no version of a middle ground where a bit of this in balance with other traits is healthy and what is healthy, utter revulsion at csa, is not an opposite unhealthy extreme either.

So it’s nothing like personality disorders.

It’s like men entitled to see others as sexual objects for their pleasure, and seeing that as the most important thing, and seeing how much power they have over objects who are children, and how that power over them gives the peadophile unending use of said object, because the object is much less likely to be able to speak up and get protection.

It’s about men who see children as walking holes to fuck. The same way misogynistic rapists see women as walking holes to fuck.

It’s not a personality disorder it’s an active choice.

@verymiddleaged

I don’t understand your first paragraph, so the rest doesn’t make sense.

It doesn’t matter if they’ve temporarily stopped offending, they have offended. Which means there’s no such thing as a non offending minor attracted person.

So this hypothetical non offending peadophile some are arguing to provide therapy before they offend doesn’t exist. They already have offended.

But they are lying to themselves and they know that.

They just do. Same as everyone does when they do things they know are wrong/ destructive/ cause harm.

Tell yourself it's not really 'that bad'. But everyone who does that knows the truth.

Thinking of addicts here- drugs alcohol but other things I'm sure.

They know full well what they are doing.

And yes rape is about power, also about opportunity, and often getting one over on someone/ some people. Which is the power thing.

Loads of men who abuse young children aren't paedophiles at all. Or, are also attracted to adults.

In the piece I linked it said 30% or something of the men had partners.

In Germany surely there's not much need to have a partner/ and no forced marriage (I mean for vast majority of population). Yet they have partners.

So... No need to rape children any more than a need to rape adults.

In the end if there's a sexuality it's 'rapist'. The acceptance they will all offend points to that.

Trying to type and do other things isn't a great plan!

Coming from a child protection background I've only ever worked with men who have actively abused children. It is how they have come into my orbit.

Logically these men will have had a time when they recognized a sexual attraction towards children but hadn't acted on it.

Do some men manage to remain at that stage? It wouldn't seem unreasonable to imagine that for some the social stigma is so great that they don't act on these impulses. So they would be non abusive.

I agree that with the easy availability of indecent images they would be a significant minority, even of those men who work to manage these thoughts. But you would need to talk to someone who worked for an organization like Stop It Now to know.

I don't think they should be the main focus, although I think they should be given support. Reducing recidivism and providing support to victims should both receive more support than they do currently.

@verymiddleaged

Trying to type and do other things isn't a great plan!

Coming from a child protection background I've only ever worked with men who have actively abused children. It is how they have come into my orbit.

Logically these men will have had a time when they recognized a sexual attraction towards children but hadn't acted on it.

Do some men manage to remain at that stage? It wouldn't seem unreasonable to imagine that for some the social stigma is so great that they don't act on these impulses. So they would be non abusive.

I agree that with the easy availability of indecent images they would be a significant minority, even of those men who work to manage these thoughts. But you would need to talk to someone who worked for an organization like Stop It Now to know.

I don't think they should be the main focus, although I think they should be given support. Reducing recidivism and providing support to victims should both receive more support than they do currently.

I worked in residential social work, and thankfully only dealt with boys who commit csa during training or covering shifts. Or when I worked in secure units.

But all had been using images of abuse, including the youngest who was ten. And that’s going back 15/18 years now.

The forensic psychologists and other professionals in the mdt team were very clear that this is the standard pattern of development for peadophiles. That they will already be choosing to access images of abuse as they are sexually developing. They will already be committing sex offences long before they are men. And the gratification they get from that far outweighs any other stimulation or feedback they could gain.

Whether or not there is any way to reduce risk of reoffending once convicted is a separate issue, and not a feminist one.

But the reality is that AW and others in the map and nomap communities are advocating for rebranding to meet the needs of mythical non offending peadophile.

Several posters appear sympathetic to this concept. I’m saying it’s an irrelevant point because the hypothetical non offending map doesn’t exist. I’m not convinced they ever did, but at the very least these days they don’t. Because current teens and the generation before them are soaked in porn. The social stigma around more extreme porn is already massively reduced, and that’s broken down barriers to accessing images of abuse. So at the very least in those generations there is no such thing as a non offending map. And people claiming there is, and advocating for removing the stigma by rebranding, are glaring fucking red flags and should be viewed from a safeguarding perspective.

'Do some men manage to remain at that stage? It wouldn't seem unreasonable to imagine that for some the social stigma is so great that they don't act on these impulses. So they would be non abusive.

I agree that with the easy availability of indecent images they would be a significant minority, even of those men who work to manage these thoughts. But you would need to talk to someone who worked for an organization like Stop It Now to know.'

Just couple of points.

The social stigma is natural.
As animals we want to protect our young. Generally.
As humans we know that sex is a thing for maturity (and we put an age to that rather than saying that's the line).
As humans we know that pre pubescent children are not physically ready for sex. They are just not to have sex with. In any way.
Rightly wanting to have sex with young children is considered appalling and yes deviant. We are naturally repulsed and shocked by it.

It's not like stigma that exists widely around claiming benefits or having lots of sex partners esp if female.

It's inbuilt. Rational.

The same feelings as incest. Also a rational deep seated horror.

There's a biological reason reason for both. It's definitely not a conscious thing at all that's why it's seen as just outrageous but there it is.

Stigma implies something unfairly judgemental. To me anyway. Surely to most people?

Framing this as stigma is another sleight of hand.

Note also that those who do not think 'sex work is work' are described as stigmatising esp prostitutes. The idea that there's any other reason is just not on the table.

The idea it's the purchasers that are the ones that are seen as awful is not considered either.

Also note that the push to de-stigmatise (normalise) paying for sex has been very very successful.

Queer theory = blur boundaries, break them down.

And it's happening and successfully so in a tranche of related areas at the moment.

Remember 'swerfs and t*fs'? Always together.

There's a bunch of views all insisted are part of the same approach and so must be adhered to.

Sex work is work
No kink shaming
Being your whole self to work
Reduce stigma of fetishes- celebrate at pride
More?

Just remembered the uni materials for supporting students in 'sex work' have all been mainly about stigma. How to deal with it.

This is all linked it just is.

Having an uncontrollable urge to rape makes you extremely dangerous.

Is there support available to men who feel strongly they'd like to rape an adult? Who seek out content showing real rape?

Dunno but for sure male sexual domination including with distress for woman is mainstream. The titles of loads of it are violent and focus on woman being hurt. And raped is not uncommon, as long as the men can tell themselves it's not 'real'.

But that's just a kink, kinks are personal and harmless, and kink shaming is wrong...

It all feels part of the same thing. And that same thing is queer theory.

@CheeseMmmm

This is all linked it just is.

Having an uncontrollable urge to rape makes you extremely dangerous.

Is there support available to men who feel strongly they'd like to rape an adult? Who seek out content showing real rape?

It’s not an uncontrollable urge.

Men are perfectly capable of controlling their urges. If they weren’t they would be raping children in plain site.

But they don’t. They plan and prepare and groom their victims. They choose them carefully and manipulate their minds to ensure compliance and silence.

That is all an entirely controlled and conscious choice.

Don’t dismiss their culpability by suggesting they can’t control these ‘urges’.

They view children as objects. Just walking holes to fuck. That’s a choice to view others than way not an urge.

I'm not saying that- at all.

I'm saying that men who are attracted to men or women it's not assumed that they are all rapists or will sexually attack at some point.

So why is it with the these men? That makes no sense.

The fact it is accepted means that it's not a 'sexuality'. It's something else entirely.

Something much worse.

@CheeseMmmm

I'm not saying that- at all.

I'm saying that men who are attracted to men or women it's not assumed that they are all rapists or will sexually attack at some point.

So why is it with the these men? That makes no sense.

The fact it is accepted means that it's not a 'sexuality'. It's something else entirely.

Something much worse.

Then you’re not being very clear.

The post I quoted you said ‘having an uncontrollable urge to rape makes you extremely dangerous’

It’s not an uncontrollable urge, it’s an entirely controlled choice to rape. It’s evident it’s highly controlled because of the lengths they go to when grooming victims, silencing them and hiding their deviancy.

None of which is anything to do with an uncontrollable urge.

@CheeseMmmm
I agree with you that our horror at certain things ‘stigma’ is natural.
The blurred boundaries are wrong.
All the Queer theories against ‘stigma’ are dangerous and erode boundaries but by bit.

I am sure that stigma and shame do stop people from putting evil actions in to practice.

@Clymene thank you for reading the AW book properly and posting your breakdown of the contents.

I meant, stigma and shame help prevent people from putting evil urges into practice.

They plan and prepare and groom their victims. They choose them carefully and manipulate their minds to ensure compliance and silence.

So definitely do this.
Others act much more impulsively when an opportunity presents itself.
So are very clever and competent at covering their tracks, others a total idiots.
Some deny what they have done regardless of evidence and others, often teens will spill out what they have done immediately.

It's not stigma.

Stigma implies intolerance, discrimination, unfair treatment around things.

Stigma around MH issues, drug addiction etc stop people getting help. They know lots of people will judge them.

The public feeling about men who abuse pre pubescent children is not stigma.

I have posted a lot on this thread and gone into this.

Some not so.

There's a difference between stigma/ shame

And this which are just awful.

Does stigma/ shame prevent some men murdering? That doesn't feel right. It's a different thing.

@CheeseMmmm

Ok so turn it around.

Time and time again paedophiles who say they would never hurt a child turn out to have done just that. Paedophiles are well known for being extremely manipulative. Winning trust. Charming/ sincere. Lovely men. Etc.

Most people are just not that good at acting or natural manipulators.

So turn it around.

Instead of men who are sexually attracted to young children somehow all being rapists by definition.

How about some rapists find young children their main or total preference because of things like. Innocent- way easy to groom if you know how. Vulnerable. Can be abused on long term basis more easily. Can be manipulated into thinking that the abuser loves them. Feeling of power and superiority from being able often to pull the wool over eyes of those who want to protect them , parents etc.

If that makes sense then it starts to sound like a personality disorder and a particularly terrible one.

Any thoughts on that?

Does this from earlier explain my thoughts s bit better?

“CheeseMmmm

There's a difference between stigma/ shame

And this which are just awful.

Does stigma/ shame prevent some men murdering? That doesn't feel right. It's a different thing.“

CheeseMmmm
Nothing prevents some people from ydoing things.

I understand what you are trying to say about stigma. It didn’t always mean an unfair prejudice but as it could mean that nowadays, you are right it may not be the right word. Do you have one?

Whatever it is, these people exist in large numbers judging by the amount of dark web child abuse images we hear about.

There must be many different reasons for the behaviour. SSome may rein themselves in or have a conscience, knowing they are hated and condemned, or the knowing they might get caught and go to prison. Others might be psychopaths who wouldn’t care.

Most men who view images of child sexual abuse are not actual paedophiles though.

There's a thing around online porn having the effect of seeking out more and more extreme things.
There's a thing around the draw of doing things that are illicit.
There's the fact that most who abuse young children aren't actually paedophiles.
A lot of things going on.

In the end paedophile or not. It's images of sexual assault/ rape.

The police got that info a few years back and it was a vast number of People viewing/ had viewed.

Their view was so many no chance of looking into them all.

Those who did go to court often got pretty minimal punishment.

Whole thing is a disaster. For girls and boys and women and men who are victims of sex offenders.

The way online is distanced from real people in real life is a massive worry too.

The very concept that those with an apparently unstoppable urge to sexually assault/ rape small children is being seen as something stigmatised is a huge and dangerous shift.

It's easy not to sexually assault or rape those you find attractive. Most people would just not dream of it.

That desire, to sexually violate, is not something that should be de-stigmatised. IE normalised, no longer seen as a bad thing.

Do we need another word for those with a strong desire to sexually violate?

Note in the piece about Germany they could not measure whether the approach was successful. They are hoping.

If a man doesn't want to attack a child then he won't. Same as men who don't have sex with women don't all go out and rape.

Sexuality is in no way connected to being a sex offender apart from in who they want to attack.

The fact that someone actually said this out loud makes me want to vomit. Like they’re trying to normalise viewing indecent images of children.