Comments on: Paedophile is not a word

By: Andrew

Andrew — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 16:55:47 +0000

Hi bellend.

I don't think there are any excuses either for sexual abuse. I think the quote I used above makes that clear.

In the vernacular maybe it should read: That abusers CHOOSE to abuse, they are NOT mad or demented or out-of-control. They are evil fuckers.

By: bellend

bellend — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 16:28:07 +0000

Andrew,

There are no viable reasons or excues for sexual abuse.

I do not think that there is any justification. I never have and I never will. Nor do I think any time should be wasted in the attemp to understand why these sickening acts take place.

In dogs, there is a runt of the litter. I can only describe rapists, paedophiles, perverts etc as runts.

Runts that should not be studied, or cared for.
They should just be gotten rid of!

By: Andrew

Andrew — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 16:04:33 +0000

There is also the reality of evil. Some clergy choose sex with a minor as a way of satisfying themselves, while maintaining their clerical status. They choose to abuse. These priests are not demented; nor driven by uncontrollable urges. They are not out-of-control.

The above is a quote from Barry M. Coldrey's
Religious Life Without Integrity. The Sexual Abuse Crisis in the Catholic Church.

http://ncane.com/v4d

By: Bock

Bock — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 09:44:44 +0000

Try as I might, I find it difficult to disagree with you.

By: bellend

bellend — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 09:33:32 +0000

In respence to above comment from THATGIRL

The fact that any comparison between Homosexuality & Paedophilia is a farce.
If two consenting adults of the same sex wish to engage in sexual activity then all power to them. Lash away!!!
However, at the point that consent is taken out of the equation, serious repercussions are required. Any person (I use this term very loosely) who sexually abuses another should be killed. Now if the abused person happens to be an innocent child, the scumbag in question should be put to a slow, painful death.

Why should anyone who abuses children or anyone for that matter be offered the compassion of "treatment"???
Surely it would only benefit society on a whole if these bastards were disposed of.

Why should the normal Joe Public tax payer foot the bill to "treat" & imprison this kind of scum??? As it stands, we are paying for a number of these f*ckers to be fed & housed in our prisons. This is after they have destroyed the life of their victim!!!! How can that be justified?

Public stonings should be put in place for these scumbags, even that would be a far too dignified death!!!

By: that girl

that girl — Sun, 11 Mar 2007 11:37:52 +0000

I agree with and applaud your anger but why the distinction between paedophilia and abuser (even though they can and are the same issue from the perspective of the child) is important is when it comes to treatment. Let me state clearly that I am not excusing this behaviour I am merely trying to outline the context. Like or dislike the word – paedophilia is a sexual orientation – not only an abusive act. Paedophilia is incredibly difficult to treat because of this. For example – if someone were to tell you that your hetrosexual or homosexual orientation was a crime (and it's not too long ago since that was the case in terms of the latter) you would justifiably take issue with me and reject it because that's the way you are biologically wired. Paedophiles are sexually attracted to children and most if not all of them cannot maintain a sexual or emotional relationship with an adult. They are hardwired that way. We have to start dealing with this as a fact and only then can we start dealing with the appalling behavioural outcomes.

The most that treatment can hope for with paedophilia is that behaviour is modified – not cured. Only a small number of sexual abusers are paedophiles – most abusers have been victims of abuse (and this is NOT saying that all victims have been abusers) and this kind of behaviour is not hard wired it is socially and behaviourally learnt therefore it can be unlearnt with appropriate therapeutic intervention.

It is in nobody's interest to confuse these two types of abuse because one can respond to therapy with some success the other can't.

The real issue is the scandalous lack of therapeuetic intervention and support for (a) victims of abuse – most of whom are abused by a stranger in or near the home and (b) abusers who are caught.

Locking people up is fine if it makes us all feel "safe in our beds" but it's avoiding the real issues.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sun, 11 Mar 2007 08:57:05 +0000

I know you aren't going to post this comment, but paedophilia is actually a word coined by Kurt Freund more than 100 years ago and it means a sexual attraction to pre-pubescent children. The fact that you can't understand the difference between an attraction and an action makes you a monster, IMO.

http://anu.nfshost.com/

By: Kav

Kav — Fri, 02 Mar 2007 08:50:01 +0000

Debollock the cunts.

By: Old Knudsen

Old Knudsen — Thu, 01 Mar 2007 00:28:16 +0000

I call them targets for execution myself.

By: Bock the Robber

Bock the Robber — Wed, 28 Feb 2007 15:31:13 +0000

Badgerdaddy: Thanks. I'm all right now.