How many paedophiles can there be?
First, it was the New Zealand airlines demonizing men as potential pedophiles and having them change seats if they were sitting next to a minor child--now it's British Airways (Hat tip: Mercurior):
The author of this opinion piece is right that the damage done to society because of the mistrust of men is high and far reaching--he points out that many men no longer teach kids, particularly in the area of physics, math and chemistry and it is hurting our science base. Just when we need more physics teachers teaching young people, we may see fewer men who are willing to take the job because the stakes of being called a perp are too high. Will the demonization of men hurt the science profession? I sure hope not.
I mean, come off it, folks. How many paedophiles can there be? Are we really saying that any time an adult male finds himself sitting next to someone under 16, he must expect to be hustled from his seat before the suspicious eyes of the entire cabin?
What about adult females? Every week there is some new tale of what a saucy French mistress is deemed to have done with her adolescent charges behind the bicycle sheds; and, disgraceful though these episodes may be, I don't hear anyone saying that children should be shielded from adult women. Do you? Or maybe I'm wrong — maybe all adults will have to carry personal cardboard partitions with them on every plane or train, just in case they find themselves sitting next to under-16s.
Even as I write, I can imagine the lip-pursing of some of my lovely high-minded readers. How would you like it, they will say, if some weird chap was plonked next to your kids? And they are right that I would worry about some strange adult sitting next to my children, chiefly because I wouldn't want the poor fellow to come to any harm.
To all those who worry about the paedophile plague, I would say that they not only have a very imperfect understanding of probability; but also that they fail to understand the terrible damage that is done by this system of presuming guilt in the entire male population just because of the tendencies of a tiny minority.
The author of this opinion piece is right that the damage done to society because of the mistrust of men is high and far reaching--he points out that many men no longer teach kids, particularly in the area of physics, math and chemistry and it is hurting our science base. Just when we need more physics teachers teaching young people, we may see fewer men who are willing to take the job because the stakes of being called a perp are too high. Will the demonization of men hurt the science profession? I sure hope not.
posted by Helen at 7:36 AM
36 Comments:
If thet tried to move me, a ruckus would ensue. The only time I can get some elbow room in the ridiculously narrow seats they sell is when I'm seated next to a person of small stature. Demonizing male strangers as potential pedophiles ignores the fact that most victims are molested by people they know. Perhaps forcing the parents to be seated away from their child would be more prudent.
You would think if it were really airline policy that the ticketing computer would just take care of it without anybody ever realizing what's going on.
Doug Wade,
Yes, or parents could put in a request when they buy a ticket for the unaccompanied minor which then takes it out of the hands of the airlines.
i am in 2 minds about this, its bad that they demonise men, but.. there isnt nothing worse than flying for 7 hours sitting next to a wriggling little brat. and you are expected to look after it..
this has happened to my fiancee, and we see kids running wild throwing things etc.. why cant parents look after their own kids.. sit with them.. and let the parents take care of them..
this man who wrote the article (boris johnson) was a MP, member of parliament. perhaps he will say something to someone.. we can all hope he will
The largest part of the answer to child sexual abuse is giving ALL our children safety training. Most perverts who bother children are careful about who the bother, they pick carefully and groom the children. Trained children are harder to groom, report faster, and make better witnesses.
Then you lock up the pervert for 20 years. It would work.
I start my children's safety training at 3. And then I review it with them periodically. By 7 my eldest daughter would roll her eyes and spout off the three kinds of touch and what to do if anyone tried to give her a secret touch. "I remember, OK daddy?" Ok honey, mission accomplished.
Trey
Ironically, 99% of the men they might happen to move away from the little ones would willingly die in flames to save the kids' lives.
That's the way we are.
On top of all that...is there anyplace safer for kids than an airplane? I mean, where is this theoretical molestation going to happen? In the 1 remaining cubic meter of open space on the plane?
If it's even possible to molest a child on a plane without getting caught, then clearly airline security needs some serious improvement.
@ Mercurior
"I am in 2 minds about this, it's bad that they demonise men, but.. there isn't nothing worse than flying for 7 hours sitting next to a wriggling little brat. and you are expected to look after it."
I think you're missing the point, Mercurior. If they sit you next to some annoying kid, you are entirely at liberty to request to be moved, but it's YOUR choice. Here, it's not. BA is deliberately fanning the flames of hysteria with a policy that is over-zealous in the extreme and for which they would be lynched were they to try applying it to any other sub group. The simple way to see this bigotry for what it is is to replace 'men' with some other minority:
"I'm sorry, you'll have to move. We don't allow blacks to sit next to children"
"I'm sorry, you'll have to move. We don't allow gays to sit next to children"
"I'm sorry, you'll have to move. We don't allow jews to sit next to children"
My second point is that discrimination against men in any issue regarding children has become so pervasive that I believe it has moved beyond mere exaggerated fear and towards a deliberate policy to control young minds: by systematically removing men from childrens' lives - from the family through divorce, restrictive visitation rights and restraining orders granted with a process that no country claiming itself to be free has any business calling justice, and from schools and other structured and unstructured activities through media driven suspicion, ever more onerous background checks, wholly unfair stigmatization on the basis of unfounded accusations, convoluted and petty liability-induced rules, punitive divorce/support awards requiring excessive hours at work etc. etc. etc. - by forcing a wedge between men and children in that way, it becomes possible to poison the minds of the next generation against men in a way that simply would not be possible otherwise.
Finally, checkout this article from last week which has some stats on how few male teachers there are now in the UK:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=415547&in_page_id=1770
To MS
"My second point is that discrimination against men in any issue regarding children has become so pervasive that I believe it has moved beyond mere exaggerated fear and towards a deliberate policy to control young minds: by systematically removing men from childrens' lives - from the family through divorce, restrictive visitation rights and restraining orders granted with a process that no country claiming itself to be free has any business calling justice, and from schools and other structured and unstructured activities through media driven suspicion, ever more onerous background checks, wholly unfair stigmatization on the basis of unfounded accusations, convoluted and petty liability-induced rules, punitive divorce/support awards requiring excessive hours at work etc. etc. etc. - by forcing a wedge between men and children in that way, it becomes possible to poison the minds of the next generation against men in a way that simply would not be possible otherwise."
There's one major problem with your theory: half of the minds in the next generation are going to be male. That has important implications about how much women can persecute men.
bobh:
Wha? Haven't roughly half of the minds in ALL generations been male? So... I don't see how the "implications" of that fact alone can be terribly important.
i dont know if you have travelled a lot, but a lot of the times there is no other space to move too.
now as i said i am in 2 minds, one its good that as a male i wont suffer the problem, i remember once this little brat kept spitting, kicking the chair, his father was in the front seat and did nothing..
have you ever travelled with a kid like that.. its bad to say the least, so in that case i would gladly ask to move if there was room.
the other is it does demonise men, but where are the kids parents.. thats what i would like to ask, boris was the parent, but the other mothers and fathers.. shouldnt they be looking after their own kids, its not the duty of everyone to look after their kids, its not the staffs duty , where is the parental responsibility. the parents should look after their own kids.. but they would rather other people do it.
Policies like this would not be tolerated of a New York second if any other group was the focus of the policy. Try and stop blacks, Muslims or women from sitting next to children and see what happens.
Under the perverse (pun intended) of the airlines men shouldn't sit next to women as an even greater percentage of rapist are man than child molesters. I couldn't sit next to a 14 year old boy but Debra "Too Pretty for Prison" Lafave could.
Next they'll start having separate restrooms and water fountains for men, maybe even restaurants. Sound familar? If you're over 50 it will.
What about female child kidnappers? Do those exist? And what could be easier than befriending a child on a long plane flight?
The correct policy should be, no unaccompanied minors on airline flights.
It's pervasive.
I was recently asked to assist with a Sunday School class for three- to four-year-old kids. The teacher I'm assisting is a young father and his kid is one of the ones in the class. Total of four kids. Two adult men to four little kids for a class lasting less than an hour.
The reason: Double coverage. I'm there to make sure the other guy doesn't molest the kids, and vice versa. Or perhaps the real story is that I'm there to make sure the other guy isn't falsely accused of molesting the kids, and vice versa.
Apparently one woman is okay, but one man or a man and a woman (other than husband and wife) are right out.
And, you know, I don't blame my church. I think they're being smart. It's the fact that this is now the smart policy that troubles me so much, becuase of what it says for the larger society.
"Next they'll start having separate restrooms and water fountains for men, maybe even restaurants. Sound familar? If you're over 50 it will."
In my neighborhood, they already have separate restrooms for men and women. And a Hooters.
Anon. 3:02
I meant separate restrooms for men and boys although we don't have neighborhood restrooms where I live.
Maybe we just need restroom attendants every where. At the TVA&I Fair, when I was a kid, they always had a man in the restroom "watching" it. At the time I wasn't sure why. It was common to tip him a quarter or something.
Of course, if we went back to that, who would watch the watcher? He could be a pervert too. After all, he's male.
Of course, if we went back to that, who would watch the watcher? He could be a pervert too. After all, he's male.
Sheesh, do I have to do all the thinking here? Obviously she won't be male!
" How many paedophiles can there be?"
"The current study is the largest to date to employ pedophilic stimuli and genital measures with men drawn from a community sample of volunteers. The current results suggest that sexual arousal to pedophilic stimuli occurs among a sizable minority of normal men who report no pedophilic behavior and is not necessarily associated with pedophilic behavior. Consistent with previous data (Barbaree & Marshall, 1989; Briere & Runtz, 1989; Fedora et al., 1992; Freund & Watson, 1991), 20 % of the current subjects self-reported pedophilic interest and 26.25 % exhibited penile arousal to pedophilic stimuli that equaled or exceeded arousal to adult stimuli." - Hall, 1995
"What about adult females? Every week there is some new tale of what a saucy French mistress is deemed to have done with her adolescent charges behind the bicycle sheds"
That's child molestation, not paedophilia. Someone who is attracted to adolescents is an ephebophile.
"To all those who worry about the paedophile plague"
A "paedophile plague" does not exist. Paedophilia is an orientation (okay, according to the APA it's an illness), it does not imply sexual activity with children.
-
There will certainly be paedophiles sitting next to children on planes, but assuming that the majority of them are child molesters is ridiculous.
~ BLueRibbon, author of Paedosexuality
Blue Ribbon:
Paedophilia is a DANGEROUS illness and perversion that wrecks the lives of innocent children. Your NAMBLA garbage notwithstanding, it is not normal, not alternative, it is by definition sick and morally depraved. It is not the next civil right and you are not the next Dr. King. And I am not a bigot. What you are spewing is trash and deserves the same treatment.
Get yourself some help, don't con yourself into normalizing dangerous, deviant thoughts and behaviors. What is next? Civil rights for cannibals?
Fight your delusion, find a psychologist who specializes in treatment of child molesters and repudiate the thoughts and desires.
You didn't really read my post, did you?
I'm not saying that it should be acceptable to have sex with children, I'm explaining that paedophilia is not sex with children. The APA make that reasonably clear in their definition, which states -
* Over a period of at least 6 months, recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors involving sexual activity with a prepubescent child or children (generally age 13 years or younger).
* The person has acted on these urges, or the sexual urges or fantasies cause marked distress or interpersonal difficulty.
* The person is at least age 16 years and at least 5 years older than the child or children in Criterion A.
Masturbating to thoughts of children is certainly acting on those urges, but it doesn't harm a child.
I don't support NAMbLA, because I don't support the abolition of AoC laws.
A thought is not dangerous, actions can be (in these circumstances they are). It is the thought which I am defending, but you aren't prepared to read what I write in order to understand that.
I will not go to a psychologist who treats child molesters, because I am not a child molester. I find children sexually attractive, which I do not believe requires treatment. If I went to a psychologist and explained that I'm attracted to children, he would treat me like a child molester, which is another reason why therapy is pointless.
Your stereotypes are based on one group of paedophile activists, NAMbLA. Don't apply their campaign focus to me, because it makes you look foolish.
Of course I look foolish to you: You masturbate while thinking about children.
It makes my day that I look foolish to you. I consider it personal validation. Thank you for sharing that.
Do you also ignite a flame thrower in a fireworks factory and say that is is OK because you are not attempting to create an explosion??? They pull you burned and smoking from the wreckage, everyone else burned to death, and you say "I don't know what happened! I was only fantasizing about lighting the cherry bombs. I did not mean to actually do it. I am not an arsonist, I just wish I was and spend my time fantasizing about it." Can somebody send this man a dollar, clues are on sale.
I read your post, you are a ticking time bomb trying to justify your illness and depravity. Get help, or get arrested. The folks inside jail will have a treament for you.
And I am trying to be polite. Nuff said. Can I get a witness here?
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
I'm interested in your opinion of "normal" heterosexuals who have rape fantasies. Are they "ticking time bombs" too, or does it only apply to people who are attracted to children?
"Get help"
Which, in your opinion, means,
"Go to a psychologist, tell him something that he'll think means "kiddiefucker", then life will be great!"
"or get arrested"
It's not illegal to be attracted to children. You managed to ignore that, ummm, significant fact.
Experts admit that they can't "cure" paedophilia. Are you really qualified to suggest otherwised?
People who masturbate while thinking of illegal, hurftul activies are indeed ticking time bombs.
Get help means work to reduce and eliminate your depraved, ill sexual desires.
It is not illegal to inject battery acid into your veins either. Just stupid and deadly.
You have a serious problem, you can work to to reduce it, or work to increase it. Your web site makes it clear what your choice is. Perhaps it is not too late for you to make a better choice. Perhaps it is.
"People who masturbate while thinking of illegal, hurftul activies are indeed ticking time bombs."
So, does that apply to "normal" men who have rape fantasies? If not, why does a particular sexual attraction make you more likely to act on your urges?
"You have a serious problem, you can work to to reduce it"
Are the World's experts wrong when they say they don't know how to "cure" paedophilia? Would you tell someone that you're a paedophile if you thought that the psychologist would treat you like a child molester?
Your "solutions" are rehashed, debunked belief.
If I WERE a likely child molester who masturbated while thinking of having sex with children, I hope to God someone would give me the help I needed. Desperately. And I would seek it. I would pray for it, I would fast for it, I would light candles, I would go to a monastary, I would do what it took. If I had to go through 15 therapists to find one who could help me I would.
I would call them up and say "I have this terrible problem, I am sexually attracted to children. It is scarry and embarassing and oh my God so wrong. I have got to get help because I will NOT hurt anyone. Can you help me? Do you know someone who can help me? I so need help."
You can do this. You can do it today. If you hear ANY revulsion on the phone, hang up and try the next name. It is in your power to choose to fight. God help you do it. It is my prayer that you make this happen, that you allow it to happen. God knows why you have these unhealthy desires, you can fight against them instead of honoring them. Start today. Start now.
That is the best I can say to you.
"If I WERE a likely child molester who masturbated while thinking of having sex with children"
There is a HUGE difference between masturbating to thoughts of children and actually having sex with children. You believe that someone who masturbates to those thoughts is likely to molest, but that's simply your opinion.
"I would call them up and say "I have this terrible problem, I am sexually attracted to children. It is scarry and embarassing and oh my God so wrong.
It's not scary or embarassing, nor is it worong. My parents know about this and they find the subject uncomfortable, but I don't.
"God help you do it. It is my prayer that you make this happen, that you allow it to happen. God knows why you have these unhealthy desires, you can fight against them instead of honoring them"
Please define "honoring them".
I'm not a religious person. You appear to have a religious dislike of "impure thoughts" though. When you refer to "fighting thoughts", you are reminding me of "therapies" used for homosexuals, which are now accepted as junk science.
To Anon 10:38, etc, etc, etc,
Actually I think you need to read BlueRibbons posts and give him credit for a little bit of intellectual thought on the issue instead of being a reactionary. While he takes it a little further than I would, he does make a crucial distinction: ones ability to control ones self in the face of temptation.
If you found a woman attractive and were able to look at photos of her at gradually younger ages, you'd find a point where she was no longer attractive to you, sexually. But the truth is, if you didn't know what age she was in any of the photos, then your "threshold" of what's too young would differ from the next person's. There IS a definitive age of consent, maybe it's sixteen and maybe it's eighteen. Few would argue that it's either lower or higher than that range. But I defy you to consistently be able to tell the difference between a sixteen year-old and an fifteen year-old just from visual appearance.
The ability to exercise self-restraint here is the key. Blueribbon might find that fifteen year old quite attractive, but he knows damn well that she's off-limits, and I respect that.
That's what's really defficient in American society today: self-restraint. Far too many of us succomb to our foibles and accept no blame: it's the way we were born, right? We're sick, mentally ill, right? Not our fault! we say.
No. No, recognizing those illicit desires for what they are and THEN restraining ones self is the strength. No psychiatry needed, thank you very much.
i remember once seeing a woman, dressed nicely, she looked early 20's. i thought hey she is good looking should i ask.. i didnt as it happens.
i later found out she was 15, if i had asked her i could have been arrested for child abuse, or grooming as its called now..
the problem is legal age and age via looks can be completely different, and sometimes the girls want an older man, and they dress to get the attention.
girls mature at different rates, if there is no form of coercion, then 15 year olds, or 14, should be able to decide..
why is it that it only matters if the man is older than the girl by a few more years, girls have sex with boys at their own age and thats right..
i matured fast physically, but mentally i matured slowly.
http://www.csun.edu/~sr2022/soc456/pedophilia.htm
I've read a lot of material by Gene Abel. His studies frequently make people terrified of people who are attracted to children. I'll let you decide whether this is influenced by the fact that he sells software designed to "screen people for paedophilia".
when this happens
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/main.jhtml;jsessionid=UCY2QRXSLGFRZQFIQMFCFFWAVCBQYIV0?xml=/health/2006/11/17/ftpageant17.xml
Make sure we position the money just right," the pageant director says from offstage. A moment later the display of notes across her winner's sash is in perfect alignment with Regan's smile. It is the kind of pose you'd expect of a Vegas showgirl, but this girl in a sequined dress and heavy make-up is only five years old.
and they wonder why there is so much hysteria
More than 3,000 beauty contests for children are held in America each year
42.
視訊做愛視訊美女無碼A片情色影劇kyo成人動漫tt1069同志交友網ut同志交友網微風成人論壇6k聊天室日本 avdvd 介紹免費觀賞UT視訊美女交友..........................
性愛影片色咪咪影片網哈啦聊天室咆哮小老鼠影片aa成人漫畫葉晴貼影片影片轉檔程式情色影片foxy下載色情小說女影片免費下載a片aa免費看情色文學成人小說aa 片免費看影片 aa訊豆豆出租名模情人視訊aaa影片下載城男同志影片免費影片線上直播日本美女寫真集免費av18禁影片18成人卡通成人a片同志影片5278影片卡通影片做愛影片視訊交友網
Post a Comment
<< Home