Pedophile Activist on BBC Radio 4 Behind The Crime

[BitMuch]

A convicted pedophile describes his crimes against girls with great self-pity, says his victims did not have negative reactions and if they had he would have stopped before he got caught and argues to reduce stigma for pedophiles. The presenters psychologists Sally Tilt and Dr Kerensa Hocken do not challenge him and repeatedly call for viewers to sympathise with what they call his 'compulsion', comparing his 'attraction' to our desire to eat unhealthy food. Is this the next target for 'just be kind you judgy bigot' propaganda?

www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m001b43m

It was produced in partnership with the Prison Radio Association. Does that mean this episode is being played to prisoners?

Bookmark, I want to listen to this. Sounds...., the pizza I had for tea didn't have its life blighted.

Urgh.

WTAF????? Just when you thought the beeb couldn't sink any lower!!

The damage that paedophiles do cannot be rationalised away. I'll listen to the programme to hear but it sounds to me like a complaint to the BBC is in order. Don't they ever learn, I'm sure Jimmy Saville would have said the girls enjoyed his attentions, the same goes for Jeffrey Epstein and many other men who see women and children as objects. Makes me absolutely furious.

If you listened to the programme properly you would have heard the psychologists talking about why they talk dispassionately about the crime and don’t challenge him. I don’t know where you got the term activist from as he’s someone who got caught exposing himself to children. He talks about why he thinks it started and how he couldn’t stop himself. He couldn’t stand his behaviour any longer and deliberately got arrested. The psychologists talk about why he convinced himself his actions had no negative consequences. He doesn’t argue to reduce the stigma of the crime but says if there was more psychological support at the time he may have been able to stop. He did talk about the stigma and says that is what stops people going for help, so he wasn’t advocating for it to be accepted by society.

I think your post is a misrepresentation of what the programme is about.

Will listen to it tomorrow

He did talk about the stigma and says that is what stops people going for help,
Of course there's going to be stigma for these acts. Haven't listened, but is he saying he knows it's wrong and he needs help, but because he'll be judged, he'll just keep doing it?

It's my understanding that 'asking for pedophilia to be de-stigmatised to encouragement pedophiles to get help' is a fairly well known bit of manipulation.

Bookmarking to listen to. I don't think there is ever any need in any world to destigmatise child rapists.

Clearly this is one I’ll need to listen to before commenting as the show seems to have been interpreted differently by different people.

Is this the next target for 'just be kind you judgy bigot' propaganda?

It's not the next target, it is THE target and has been all along.

As for calling them MAPS, give me a fucking break, their problem is not going to be overcome by rebranding or a good PR campaign. FFS

Yes, I too am being untoward about paedophiles.

I suppose it’s difficult because I don’t think peadophilia should be destigmatised, but I can also recognise that the stigma associated with paedophilia might stop some people seeking help/intervention to prevent them offending. Not sure what the answer is there.

What help or interventions are there? It is not a disease to be cured, this is who they are, they will not change or get better.

I understand what you are saying. Could be progressive if not misused.
I'm a victim of paedophilia myself and would like it if more kids were more protected in the long run.

I took from it that he wished there was more help available and the psychologists talked about intervention earlier on stopping people from offending. I don’t think there was any suggestion at all that the crime should be destigmatised. Just that it was difficult to ask for help because of the stigma.

’The presenters psychologists Sally Tilt and Dr Kerensa Hocken do not challenge him and repeatedly call for viewers to sympathise with what they call his 'compulsion'’

Do you understand what their job is? Did you miss the whole explanation of what they’re there to do and how they work with offenders?

RRRRRRRRRRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGE.

Er, sorry. It's too late for me to be reading more male-pandering bullshit tonight (the programme description, nobody on here).

As you were.

I have worked with victims for the last 20+ years. I have colleagues who work with offenders. This work is not well developed yet and needs a lot more research and effort put in in. But I am glad that some people are willing to do it, in order to try and stop further victimization of the vulnerable. What I know about offenders -

1. Sex offenders of any sort are always are self pitying and downplay or deny any damage to their victims. Its a lost cause trying to get this to happen.

2.Offering a place where people feel supported gives an opportunity to stop people acting on these urges. The acting out they want to do is never condoned, these programs are clear that what they do is unacceptable and have strict rules on reporting - but the focus is on keeping the offenders engaged so they can stop acting out. 3.Sexual attraction to minors seems to appear in all cultures and across time. It does not seem to be a choice but a hard wired sexual preference. This is not referring to sadistic sexual offenders who will victimize anyone they can get away with, who often target children. In my experience, nothing will stop these people from offending. But sexual attraction only to children is not necessarily a choice. Again, this is not to condone enjoyment of it or allow acting on this - that is always a complete no. Although there are countries, such as Japan, where you can buy Manga which depicts these acts or child sized sex dolls. People using it would argue it is just drawings or plastic. To me, that should not be allowed. 4.There is a massive difference depending on whether attraction is to pre or pose pubescent children. It is a lot easier to stop offending with post pubescent children. I hate all sex offending, as I have seen the effects first hand. But I want it to stop and if this helps, I am in support.

Most incels manage not to rape anyone. I'm attracted to men. If they didn't consent to having sex with me, I'd find it extremely easy not to sexually assault any of them. There are thousands of people in sexless marriages against their personal preference, and they manage not to sexually abuse anyone. So, why are we told peadophiles require counselling or 'help' to prevent them assaulting and raping children simply because they're attracted to them?

I've just been listening to this, just by chance. I thought it was a really interesting little piece and it's been misrepresented by some on here.

Excellent point.

Because some people struggle more with impulse control. And people like you or those in sexless marriages have options if they want to express themselves sexually, like leaving, having an affair or finding a willing partner. If you dont have that option, it can make it harder to deal with.

@Wheresmywoolyjumpers what do you think should then be the case? If someone says their urge to express themselves sexually can't happen because it's illegal, what's the consequence to them? What's the worst thing that happens to someone not getting to express themselves how they want to sexually?

@Wheresmywoolyjumpers
"But I want it to stop and if this helps, I am in support."

A lot of things could help.
This is the be-kind option looking all cute and baby faced.

Banning, castration, making paedophilia even more stigmatised also help.

We just don't find the ideas very nice.
I'm done being nice.

To be fair, I stopped reading the op at "no negative reactions". Just get the boat already.