Radio 4, 9:30pm: programme about paedophilia.

Should be informative and measured, may be of interest to those with the view above (in my dreams).

Ok here we go;

chemical castration would be ideal level of peado’ control but at the minimum level: registration, like the American system where the whole neighborhood knows who they are and where they live.
If they screw up again – death sentence.

chemical castration doesn’t exactly stop the sexual attraction….

I dunno. I find it quite hard to find anyone who has been chemically castrated attractive.

Yuh right. That didnt occur to me. It wouldn’t stop the grooming either.

Sod it, just slowly cut them in half on a giant band saw then!
🙂

Nail em up
Nail some sense into them

The only think to do with them is prison with no parole.
One of the primary fuctions of prison is to protect the public – and I can’t think of any better reason to keep someone off the streets.

What’s the attraction of listening to a show like that?

EDIT: Pure chance I heard it Dez as i listen to a lot of radio 4 but fair point not sure i could recommend it – though it may chance some attitudes

It was on this morning – they do mention grooming and what they said was they would not waste time taking it slowly [ grooming] and sexual content would be introduced in the first conversations by the third sentence iirc. Why waste time was the reason.

It is uncomfortable listening in places and informative.

its not uncommon for paedophiles to do pretty well in prison if the reason they’re in is kept confidential by staff, and they do well enough owing to their people skills and well honed manipulation skills…

I caught a bit of it this morning stuck in traffic on the way to work. It was an interesting listen, if a bit frightening in places.

Allayed a few myths about the predatory paedophile, there are still apparently very very few of these. Most are family members / friends but they’ll ‘only’ abuse one or maybe two people they have a close relationship with (eg fathers and daughters) and once the daughter grows up the abuse stops. And while it may clearly deeply affect the daughter, it rarely means the father will then move on to abuse other children outside the family (although there are instances where they move on to grandchildren 30-odd years later)

The scary bits were some of the stats – 10% of children suffer abuse (13% of girls / 7% of boys i think they said) which is way higher than I imagined. Although a large proportion of these include sibling or peer group abuse mainly by adolescent boys which also while clearly wrong often have semi-willing victims and is part of sexual awakening and rarely indicates that they will be abusers in later life, once through that stage.

What’s the attraction of listening to a show like that?

To understand what happens, why it happens, and (IMHO, flame me if you like) to understand there’s a difference between a Saville or Smith type and a early teenage boy coercing a similarly aged sister or girl at school into sexual experimentation. Do they also need stringing up / castration, because I’m not so sure?

also mentioned why so many were abused themselves and why they go on to abuse

DezB – Member
What’s the attraction of listening to a show like that?

Please tell me this was a troll.

To understand what happens, why it happens, and (IMHO, flame me if you like) to understand there’s a difference between a Saville or Smith type and a early teenage boy coercing a similarly aged sister or girl at school into sexual experimentation. Do they also need stringing up / castration, because I’m not so sure?

this, also Saville, while so wrong there are hardly words for it, from what I’ve heard not a paedophile as the girls were post pubescent. At the moment the tendency is much more towards same a label on ’em and scream bloody Mary. More understanding would help us reduce the amount of time this happens.

I struggle with the string em thing too, keep them the **** away from children, punish them for their crimes, but the science, as I understanding implies it is not a choice, you want to string people up for something they can’t control (talking about their thoughts here not their actions which are the result of choice). But I don’t know what the answer is, and can’t think of anything that isn’t basically putting them in a camp. But we need a better level of discussion than I have yet heard.

I heard it whilst on the way to work too.

The other point they made was that despite the high incidence of child abuse which theotherjonv mentioned, paedophilia is never discussed at all until a predatory paedophile makes the news and induces the Brass Eye style moral panic where everyone calls for the death penalty and so on.

Hence the problem continues because no-ones wants to discuss it.

Yes, that too. i’d forgotten that.

Another part I found really quite sinister was that some incidences of family abuse are not as much a ‘sexual’ matter as an ownership matter. The abuser (usually the husband / father) feels they have kind of ownership rights over the women in his family group and demanding sex with them is a way of demonstrating their power.

In a way i find that harder to rationalise than someone grooming and having sex with children because they find it sexually gratifying.

If this wasn’t a troll:

cynic-al – Member
DezB – Member
What’s the attraction of listening to a show like that?

This is probably the most important answer:

HoratioHufnagel – Member
paedophilia is never discussed at all until a predatory paedophile makes the news and induces the Brass Eye style moral panic where everyone calls for the death penalty and so on.

Hence the problem continues because no-ones wants to discuss it.

*cough*

http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/peel-centre-glentress#post-2810091

also mentioned why so many were abused themselves and why they go on to abuse

Do I detect sympathy? Eye for an eye or is it the notion that someone who has been sexually abused is incapable therefore of ever understanding at any point the devastating effects of sexually abusing a child or could it be that someone who was sexually abused as a child will understand, more than anyone, just how utterly destroying being sexually abused actually is?

FI – love how you say “sympathy” when the unbiased might way “understanding”.

I think the point is that abused people can be fundamentally “wired up wrong”, and may not want to abuse or become abusers – the root causes may have been outwith their control.

I think the point is that abused people can be fundamentally “wired up wrong”, and may not want to abuse or become abusers – the root causes may have been outwith their control.

Abused and “wired up wrong”. What are the chances.

FI – love how you say “sympathy” when the unbiased might way “understanding”.

The unbiased? Interesting.

Do I detect sympathy?

No just a fact you dont like[ and one we would do well to understand to prevent further cases] and a lazy implication for reasons known only to you 😕

Your answers were not the ones given by the show and best to listen to the show rather than get annoyed at me when I repeat what they said.

Given your recent reply I dont think this is really the thread for some low level trolling.

fervouredimage – Member

Do I detect sympathy?

And why not?

I remember reading an interview with a convicted paedophile… A terrible thing but hearing him describe how he could never live a normal sexual life, and his feelings at basically reacting wrongly to the rest of the world, was surprisingly very sad. I can’t imagine what that’s like.

Course, that doesn’t excuse his actions but he didn’t choose his perversion.

I listened to the show. It wasn’t anything particularly revelatory. This opening post of this thread was trolling of the lowest level surely? Trying to weed out members of this forum who god forbid don’t share the fully formed values of a guardian reader?

It’s far too complex a subject and far too harrowing a subject to discuss amongst those who have an obvious agenda, in my opinion.

It’s far too complex a subject and far too harrowing a subject to discuss amongst those who have an obvious agenda, in my opinion.

I’d suggest you leave then.

It’s far too complex a subject and far too harrowing a subject to discuss amongst those who have an obvious agenda, in my opinion.

What agenda – why not explain explicitly what it is you are saying rather than doing this …its a tragic attempt to get a rise and its making you look silly.