Jump to content

Disability


peter

Recommended Posts

I don't know how true it is, but I herd  recently that they are trying to get pedophilia categorized as a form of disability  in the land of the Vatican  . If that's true every kiddie fiddler will have their very own get out of jail free card

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Gone Fishing...

No sources ?

The only valid reason for calling a Pedophile disabled is for when their head is no longer connected to their neck..
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, peter said:

I don't know how true it is, but I herd  recently that they are trying to get pedophilia categorized as a form of disability  in the land of the Vatican  . If that's true every kiddie fiddler will have their very own get out of jail free card

We hear more and more about that "disability" and I suspect the population in general will eventually become "doctors" in short terms. I know I would if any of my grandchildren were tackled by one of those "disabled".  He/she would not need a hospital to be diagnosed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/6/2020 at 2:22 PM, peter said:

I don't know how true it is, but I herd  recently that they are trying to get pedophilia categorized as a form of disability  in the land of the Vatican  . If that's true every kiddie fiddler will have their very own get out of jail free card

 

Cant comment on vatican - but it was being pushed in the US recently by a female lawyer. (cue lots of outrage by those who read the headline - didnt understand it and then confused Paedophile with child sex abuser.

 

 

1st lets get it clear what Paedophilia is - ie the attraction to young children (bellow 11 -13 yrs old) - 

Paedophilia is not the abuse of children

 

Its important to get that straight because the word paedophilia is misused and typically its used as another word for child abuse - not helped by the fact most paedophiles we hear about are of course because of child abuse . As such a discussion about treating Paedophillia is derailed because people think they are talking about sexual abuse. 

 

Lets also note Paedophiles do not necessarily act on their urges - many paedophiles know that its not right and so never become child abusers.

 

Paedophilia is an aberration its wrong wiring in the brain - There will always be paedophiles  but If we move towards treating Paedophilia as an illness and remove some of societies more unpleasant intolerance**  - then we make it easier for them to come forward and seek help, in doing so we reduce the chance of paedophiles becoming abusers. 

 

Child abusers on the other hand know the law - know that its wrong - but put their gratification above the welfare and rights of the child -  they should rot in jail with no chance of release 

 

Esit to add - Where a Paedophile has child pornography then he should be treated as a child abuser - he may not have harmed a child personally - but he is involved in funding and creating the demand. 

 

** im not saying Paedophillia should be accepted -  

Edited by Eldnah
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Gone Fishing...
On 8/8/2020 at 8:29 PM, Eldnah said:

many paedophiles know that its not right and so never become child abusers.


Says who ?
Who and where are these types of pedophiles ?
 

 

On 8/8/2020 at 8:29 PM, Eldnah said:

Paedophilia is an aberration its wrong wiring in the brain


Again...says who ? 
You sure it's not a Black Hole in the Soul ?

 

 

On 8/8/2020 at 8:29 PM, Eldnah said:

remove some of societies more unpleasant intolerance


Even with your ** added, l still find this a deeply deeply disturbing statement.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Basket Case said:


Says who ?
Who and where are these types of pedophiles ?

 

Comes from a study with associated statistics - also cited by a lawyer few weeks back

As for who and where could be anyone anywhere theres no way of telling just by looking which is why paedophillia is so feared and dangerous

 

18 minutes ago, Basket Case said:

Again...says who ? 
You sure it's not a Black Hole in the Soul ?

 

Theres 2 schools of thought 

1) its a medical condition (psychological) 

2 ) Its wired in like being hetero sexual or gay or liking tall blondes etc

 

Evidence supports both arguments and its probably the case its both - 1 is treatable 2 probably isnt - at least not without seriously invasive measures eg chemical castration - ive no problem applying that to sex offenders. But if smeones never had anything but thoughts im not sure its appropriate especially if they have come forward to seek help.

 

But this ties into the other thread 

 

18 minutes ago, Basket Case said:

Even with your ** added, l still find this a deeply deeply disturbing statement.
 

Yes unfortunately thats one of those sentences that only really works talking face to face - its hard to convey meaning and nuance. its part of the accept paedophile does not mean sex offender argument  -  and the difference between wanting  a sex offender moved of your street (reasonable intolerance ) and beating a person half to death because its revealed they have urges that theyve never acted on (unreasonable intolerance)

i cant get down on paper what im actually trying to say and whats written is clumsy and yes does lead to a "so is he saying we should tolerate it" moment.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Gone Fishing...
2 hours ago, Eldnah said:

Comes from a study with associated statistics - also cited by a lawyer few weeks back

As for who and where could be anyone anywhere theres no way of telling just by looking which is why paedophillia is so feared and dangerous


So this is mainstream 'science'...?

 

2 hours ago, Eldnah said:

Theres 2 schools of thought 

1) its a medical condition (psychological) 

2 ) Its wired in like being hetero sexual or gay or liking tall blondes etc

 

Evidence supports both arguments and its probably the case its both - 1 is treatable 2 probably isnt - at least not without seriously invasive measures eg chemical castration - ive no problem applying that to sex offenders. But if smeones never had anything but thoughts im not sure its appropriate especially if they have come forward to seek help.


So, which do YOU think ? Can't be both can it..


 

 

2 hours ago, Eldnah said:

beating a person half to death because its revealed they have urges that theyve never acted on (unreasonable intolerance)

 

Were and when has this ever happened ?
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Basket Case said:

So, which do YOU think ? Can't be both can it..

 

Yes it can - although i really hope its a psychological issue as that can be cured.

Some abusers start out as the abused - that would indicate its psychological damage - 

 

But there's always been child abusers child prostitution goes right back to roman times  - now in some instances its just an easy target, in others perhaps its mental damage - but its possible some people are just wired like that - whether thats curable or not I dont know  -

8 hours ago, Basket Case said:

Were and when has this ever happened ?

 

There was a person murdered by a mob in Bristol -- because he was accused (wrongly) of being a Paedophile

There was a Paediatricians attacked because of the sign on the door (which goes to show you the stupidit of mobs)

Social media is full of boasts and support and plans of running Paedophiles out of town - Hanging Paedophiles. calling for all paedophiles to be shot or raped in prison etc - What they mean is sexual abusers of children - what thy say is paedophile - but some are some arent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look, a Paedophile IS a Child Abuser IS a Paedophile...if these sick sexual urges are not carried out physically, then no physical child abuse has taken place, however, online virtual abuse may have taken place which obviously involves physical abuse which is the hidden sexual abuse of children, child abuse manifests itself in many ways, sexual abuse is but one form of abuse, but, probably the most damaging.

Edited by pirate
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No it isnt -The law draws a distinction - the same one ive made that is a Paedophile is someone (sexually) attracted to children.

 

A Paedophile may never  abuse children  

A non paedophile may sexually abuse children  or look at child pornography 

 

Child pornography laws exist to ensure people who enable - fund and support abuse can be punished and not hide behind " i only looked at pictures that already existed" and so escape justice.

 

The fact you buy into the media lazy sex with children = paedophile and so paedophile means abuses children is why you and others see support for child abuse every where - because quite frankly the grown ups are not talking about what YOU think they are talking about. 

 

It also makes any discussion fruitless since trying to debate a subject is impossible with people who only recognise half the subject

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eldnah...you seem a little confused, and I must say, it's silly statements like...

 

"A Paedophile may never  abuse children  

A non paedophile may sexually abuse children  or look at child pornography"

 

that facilitate this sick shit to continue...

 

I ask you, if, in your opinion, A Paedophile may never abuse children, then he ain't a Paedophile then is he...and if a non paedophile does sexually abuse children then he IS a paedophile...

 

I'll give you an example of how utterly ridiculous your argument is...

I know two men, one of them is a a bricklayer who doesn't lay bricks, the other man lays bricks but is not a bricklayer.

 

I know another two men,

The first is a racing driver who's never raced in his life, the second races professionally every weekend and yet he's not a racing driver.

 

I also know of a famous boxer who makes fairy cakes for a living, he's a really nice guy who hates the site of blood...where's your head at..?

Edited by pirate
Link to comment
Share on other sites

BTW Eldnah, before you tout the "grown ups" statement, start thinking like a grown up...and please enlighten me, in your opinion, what exactly is a paedophile and what's the difference between a paedophile and a sexual child abuser..?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's really sad and criminal about this f**k**g subject/problem, is, there are individuals like "Eldnah" who are willing to play semantics with such an important, damaging problem of these modern day times... and I say, problem of modern day times, because none of this sick shit should ever be justified in 2020 and beyond.

Looking forward to your reply...Eldnah.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, pirate said:

BTW Eldnah, before you tout the "grown ups" statement, start thinking like a grown up...and please enlighten me, in your opinion, what exactly is a paedophile and what's the difference between a paedophile and a sexual child abuser..?

 

Youve had that response in almost every post 

The fact you are asking again and again and again only proves you refuse to accept the answer - 

 

 

Ive spelled it out clearly and pointed out thats the legal position ,  but here for the 100th time

 

A Paedophile is someone sexually attracted to children - or more accurately its their exclusive preference  .

A child sex abuser is someone who sexually abuses children 

 

Some if not most child sexual abusers are Paedophiles  but Paedophilia is the motive not the crime - other abusers its power - control - availability the fact the victim was a child is incidental its not the primary attraction.

 

Not all Paedophiles abuse children - some seek help and never harm a child  and some say this has them cured (we can hope)

 

Paedophilia is a condition -a sexual preference of young children and  it can result in the person abusing children, Paedophilia is not the act of abusing children - 

 

Since you are using the daily mail usage of the word and im using the (UK) legal definition - then we will forever be at crossed purposes and you will never see the difference as such its futile continuing the conversation.

 

 

Your counter examples are by the way absolute trite bollox and fall at the 1st hurdle 

For example Im not a bricklayer - but ive lain bricks to build a garden wall - so im not a bricklayer 

Nor am i a racing driver but ive (stupidly)  raced cars 

 

A slightly  better analogy would be an alcaholic 

Not all alcoholics abuse alcohol

Theres lots of non alcoholics that do 

 

 

Of course it fails as well because Alcoholics start with abusing alcohol - but tee totaller didnt work either 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting - personally im not convinced the fact you cannot understand a point when its repeatedly made and elaborated on is an indication of my intelligence.

 

My inability to explain it well is possibly an issue - but lets be honest you've made no attempt to think about anything ive said - you have your fixed media led mindset and refuse to reconsider in light of further information.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're making allsorts of assumptions about me based on my response to your dim witted statements.  You either work THE PAEDOPHILE INFORMATION EXCHANGE or you're simply a useful idiot... Do you realise you are trying to normalise this crap and I'm getting angrier every time I have to reply to your silly nit picking about what the letter of the law says...f**k the law, the law ain't doing jack about this, it's the very law you speak of and bozos like YOURSELF who make no difference whatever in stopping this issue.

 

PS...I know someone who thinks she's a thinker and yet never had an original thought enter her mind...go away and annoy someone else, I'm done here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only assumption ive made is that you havent attempted to think beyond your shallow media induced opinion. - It wasnt me that inferred you were less intelligent, nor me who inferred you are supporting child abuse Or indeed implied that because you have a different opinion it wasn't my own* . But if it makes you feel better to insinuate im a child abuser - because i think we should try to identify and treat paedophiles before children are harmed then feel free - it doesnt bother me in the slightest what a stranger says on the internet. 

 

Perhaps we can resume when you finally take stock of whats been said and accept that when you're trying to discuss 2 different but inter related issues then using the correct definition of the word is the only way to discuss without getting confused .

Whilst so ever you are sticking with the lazy daily mail** and inaccurate child abuser = paedophile and refuse to accept there's (sometimes)  a difference then its impossible to explain how one group needs help the other locking up because you are fixated on 1 group and see both groups as one.

 

 

*Somewhat ironic since the opinion im expressing is not the media narrative 

**Or guardian mirror star etc 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, pirate said:

So, I will take it really slowly with you...

 

Explain this statement...

A Paedophile may never  abuse children 

 

Ok start with

 

1) A Paedophile has a sexual attraction to children - it is in fact their sexual preference. 

2) Paedophilia is the reason a paedophile abuses children - it isnt the abuse of children -

3) Sexually abusing a child doesnt automatically make someone a paedophile ( it sounds wrong I know  but ill see point 1)

 

4)Some if not most  Paedophiles are well aware paedophilia is wrong

 

Some of those will seek help  and some will resist the urge in their own and so will never abuse children -

Hence some Paedophiles may never harm children,

 

5) Child abusers

Some of course will abuse a child close to them  - these need locking up until cured and until they've served their sentence 

 

Some Paedophiles do not see anything wrong and think its natural -

- Its these that really need identifying and helping because they are a massive risk and without treatment always will be. I would argue locked away until cured is the solution for these but once cured release them - 

 

Tragically many in this group are themselves victims of abuse it creating a vicious cycle - its these im thinking of  when i say unpleasant intolerance -

 

The last group are the real sexual predators who search out children  - this group should never be released - and if convicted of travelling abroad should have to stay in their prisons.

 

6) Then there's people who aren't paedophiles but sexually abuse a child - which i know just doesnt seem to make sense

 

The individuals sexual preference isnt a child - the child was just convenient - these are probably the worst because theres no reason other than power and gratification - these are nothing more than predators on vulnerable idividuals there is no cure for this and so never release them

Example

Man convicted of serious crime (not involving children) - on his release his wife said not living with me - he is a danger to women 

Sibling takes him in.

He abuses his niece  (under10) 

Eventually the child speaks up 

Man back in jail for child abuse - no rehab or treatment programme no psychiatrist because he isnt a paedophile just a nasty abusive bastard who preys on females 

 

The above isnt a made up example its what happened 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK...so what would you call a person who views child pornography on the internet but has never sexually abused children in person..?

28 minutes ago, Eldnah said:

 

Ok start with

 

1) A Paedophile has a sexual attraction to children - it is in fact their sexual preference. 

2) Paedophilia is the reason a paedophile abuses children - it isnt the abuse of children -

3) Sexually abusing a child doesnt automatically make someone a paedophile ( it sounds wrong I know  but ill see point 1)

 

4)Some if not most  Paedophiles are well aware paedophilia is wrong

 

Some of those will seek help  and some will resist the urge in their own and so will never abuse children -

Hence some Paedophiles may never harm children,

 

5) Child abusers

Some of course will abuse a child close to them  - these need locking up until cured and until they've served their sentence 

 

Some Paedophiles do not see anything wrong and think its natural -

- Its these that really need identifying and helping because they are a massive risk and without treatment always will be. I would argue locked away until cured is the solution for these but once cured release them - 

 

Tragically many in this group are themselves victims of abuse it creating a vicious cycle - its these im thinking of  when i say unpleasant intolerance -

 

The last group are the real sexual predators who search out children  - this group should never be released - and if convicted of travelling abroad should have to stay in their prisons.

 

6) Then there's people who aren't paedophiles but sexually abuse a child - which i know just doesnt seem to make sense

 

The individuals sexual preference isnt a child - the child was just convenient - these are probably the worst because theres no reason other than power and gratification - these are nothing more than predators on vulnerable idividuals there is no cure for this and so never release them

Example

Man convicted of serious crime (not involving children) - on his release his wife said not living with me - he is a danger to women 

Sibling takes him in.

He abuses his niece  (under10) 

Eventually the child speaks up 

Man back in jail for child abuse - no rehab or treatment programme no psychiatrist because he isnt a paedophile just a nasty abusive bastard who preys on females 

 

The above isnt a made up example its what happened 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Guest locked this topic
  • Guest unlocked this topic

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...