It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Paedophiles: The Iron Curtain is dropping

page: 8
24
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 10:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by deadeyedick
reply to post by Maslo
 





mayhem felonies leading to great bodily injury torture physical attack leaving permanent damage

I bet that this is more like the what came first the chicken or the egg.
Studies reveal that victims of abuse often grow up to be users and abusers.


And sometimes victims of abuse grow up to not abuse. Sometimes people who abuse others were not ever abused themselves. Sometimes people who ate broccoli as a child like it as adults, sometimes they don't, sometimes they don't like it as a kid and love it as adults.

What's your point? All crimes harbor the potential to turn the victim into a future perpetrator. It has a lot to do with predisposition as well. Just like some childhood abuse victims go into the sex trade, become drug addicts or alcoholics and some become succesful business people or famous movie stars. Its about the person too.




posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 10:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by Afterthought
reply to post by Maslo
 



mayhem
felonies leading to great bodily injury
torture


Child sexual abuse encompasses all of this and then some. That's why it is so horrible.


How so? Explain, because I disagree.

Does an abused child loose an essential organ? (no). Does the sexual abuse cause great bodily injury? (I dont think this is usually the case, certainly not always). Does it cause extreme pain? (I dont think its usually any worse than a serious battery is).

In some extreme cases of child sexual abuse, you may be right, but then it would not be only a sexual abuse, wouldnt it, but other crimes as well, like those mentioned in my list.
edit on 7/12/11 by Maslo because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 10:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Afterthought
reply to post by dbloch7986
 



I can overreact to a news article


At least I'm not downplaying this. Maybe you need to go back and reread my original post as well as the first page of the thread. I didn't start this thread based on ONE article.

If you believe that I really started this thread to be placed on a pedistal and believe myself to be better than everyone else, your wrong. Yes, I'm happy that I wasn't afraid to start conversation about this on ATS and I'm happy to advocate for bringing this crime into the open. I'm not perfect and I don't pretend to be. I just want to see these criminals and their seedy underground put in the light where it belongs.


I think you misunderstood. I didn't accuse you of being on a pedestal. I only said I wasn't.

The post which you replied to when this started (the one you quoted) wasn't even aimed at you unless I accidentally replied to the wrong one. It was for Silo13 because he was overreacting. You haven't overreacted dude.

Also don't read between the lines on my posts. There's no hidden meanings. I'm not trying to make a jab at you. If I wanted to accuse you personally of standing on a pedestal I would have done it outright.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 10:42 AM
link   
reply to post by dbloch7986
 






·50 to 70% of all women and a substantial number of men treated in psychiatric settings have histories of sexual or physical abuse, or both. (Carmen et al, 1984; Bryer et al., 1987; Craine et al., 1988) ·As high as 81% of men and women in psychiatric hospitals with a variety of major mental illness diagnoses, have experienced physical and/or sexual abuse. 67% of these men and women were abused as children. (Jacobson & Richardson, 1987)

www.annafoundation.org...
It takes a strong mind and help for victims not to become abusers.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 10:46 AM
link   
reply to post by deadeyedick
 


Does it surprise you that 80% of people in mental health settings were abused? That hardly represents society as a whole. That's a very specific statistic.

I know personally five people who were raped and molested as children. None of them are or were drug addicts not do they work in the sex trade. They all have good stable jobs and a couple have families.
edit on 12/7/2011 by dbloch7986 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 11:05 AM
link   
reply to post by dbloch7986
 


Well as i look at the link i provided i have to acknowledge that people with debilitating self afflictions are for the most part victims of abuse in their childhood.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 11:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by deadeyedick
reply to post by dbloch7986
 


Well as i look at the link i provided i have to acknowledge that people with debilitating self afflictions are for the most part victims of abuse in their childhood.


Again not surprising. I'm talking about those who are victims that did not turn out like that.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 12:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by wiser3
reply to post by hmdphantom
 


Sick indeed!
And how does being gay or lesbian come close to being a child abuser or rapist?


I think that there are limits for what people want to do , we are the ones who define those limits. Then after letting gays to marry in church , this question comes into mind that , why shouldn't we let those people marry in church , too ?

I mean , they are gays btw. The only difference is that they are interested in younger ages.

I think if human being continue this path , the next generations will find themselves living in a jungle.

What I am trying to get here is that if we let some people push the limits of sexual relationships further , there will be no guarantee where it would stand in the future. It is a matter of time and we will see.

There will be some Justin biber fans who will be shouting : " We want our rights in the society ". And then some open mind people will shout " Where is their freedom , where is their right ? " .At last everyone will agree to let those people do what they want legally.

The End.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 12:41 PM
link   
One thing I'm sure of is that we spend more money studying and trying to understand why people are attracted to the same sex instead of researching to discover why people are attracted to young children.

We really do have our priorities wrong when it comes to science and discovery involving the brain, genetics, and sexuality. Where I couldn't care less why one adult is attracted to another adult within a consenting relationship, I do want to know why adults are sexually attracted to children and why some child sex victims become abusers while others don't.

I'm sure the majority here can agree that this needs to be studied much more in depth than it has been and is currently.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 05:11 PM
link   
There is also the problem that peodphiles are very suceptible to extortion. So if you want power through a proxy, a pedophile is your best bet. He plays ball you get him what he wants. You know he does not have much of a coscience that can get in the way of doing your bidding and even if he should get one, he cant go out of office a hero for doing the right thing, standing up to you, because all he will be is a busted pedophile.

So you have a situation where people of wealth have a motivation to actively seek out pedophiles and get them into position of power, even worse they could reward those people by allowing them to live out their urgings and protecting them and empowering them to do so, harming more and more children in the process.
edit on 7-12-2011 by Cassius666 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 08:49 PM
link   
reply to post by scotticus prime
 


You completely understand. Your words were like an anthem.to the incredulity to what we experienced. My tears are now streaming down my face........ for you and for me and all the other people that went through this horror.

You are very brave in posting your thoughts. Most succinctly than I have ever heard. Must be your wisdom with age.

Yes, it is very difficult to be anything less than dissociative. It's a hard road to roll on. People don't understand.

Thank you for your reply. Now I know I am not alone. Your reply was beautiful in the way you described it. A harsh reality, but you hit the bulls eye. Wow....I never could have said it better!

You are my kindred spirit now....I wish you the best wholeheartedly. Tears streaming down my face..........



posted on Dec, 8 2011 @ 03:04 AM
link   
reply to post by dbloch7986
 


While you sit there ranting about these sick animals and how disgusting they are and how disgusting the crime is, how do you think that makes the victims of the crime feel? Or had you not considered that?

Ranting? I made one statement. And I stand by it. That's not ranting.
But you go for it 'dude'. Call anyone who takes a strong stand 'hysterical' / 'emotional.'
Play it down baby, play it downnnnnnnn.

You're a perfect example of exactly the point I'm making.
Water down the crime - call the 'stand-takers' 'emotional'.

*clap clap clap clap*


What if you got beat up and robbed on the playground and you came and told me and I stared crying and screaming and said you need counseling and you're screwed in the head for life?

Anyone who would equate getting 'beat up' on the playground to being raped as a child must truly be trolling or so out of their knowledge of discussion it's patently pathetic. Just because you (might) 'know' a handful of people does not equate you with insight by associate. No, what you're doing is nothing more than standing on victims to gain more height yourself.


That sensationalist attitude makes it worse for the victims than it already is.

Nothing I stated could make it 'any worse' for a victim than it already is. To assume so is ludicrous.

Oh and before I forget, if pointing out a cure = Civil Commitment Centers for Sexual Predators and linking to one such place to you equals sensational? Again, you're doing your best to water down something that will not be diluted, not by me, ever.

Happy trolling.

peace
edit on 8-12-2011 by silo13 because: fix bbc



posted on Dec, 8 2011 @ 03:08 AM
link   
reply to post by dbloch7986
 


Does it surprise you that 80% of people in mental health settings were abused? That hardly represents society as a whole. That's a very specific statistic.

Does it surprise you that only leaves 20% who were not?

And yes, you're right, that is a VERY specific statistic.

Oh hell, I needed that laugh.

peace

edit on 8-12-2011 by silo13 because: spcaing



posted on Dec, 8 2011 @ 03:14 AM
link   
reply to post by hmdphantom
 


So you consider it a slippery slope. I understand the thought process, but you have to admit that as an argument, slippery slope is very very weak. And we could construct such argument about almost any change of laws or morals, by the way, so according to the same logic, nothing would be allowed to change.



posted on Dec, 8 2011 @ 03:17 AM
link   
reply to post by hmdphantom
 





I mean , they are gays btw. The only difference is that they are interested in younger ages.


Child abusers are not just gays, they are heterosexuals, too. So according to this line of thought, heterosexual pedophile relationships should have been legal long ago, after all, heterosexuals are accepted for millenia. This shows that it is really an absurd logic, when in fact, the opposite is true, age of consent only increased in the past century.
edit on 8/12/11 by Maslo because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 8 2011 @ 03:40 AM
link   
reply to post by dbloch7986
 

Your holier than thou attitude and overblown emotional response are getting in the way of your reading comprehension.

There you go again - one strong statement and agreeing with another poster against abysmally ridiculous claims and out comes your water can, lol. Holier than thou? Overblown? Keep trying...


There's no child rapists here and getting all bent out of shape over a news article is fruitless.

Really? Are you so sure about that? Child rapists are everywhere in society. Didn’t you even say you ‘know’ FIVE people who’ve been raped as children? Enough said.


The point was not at all that all pedophiles have brain tumors. I am not sure why you went off on that tangent because I'm sure that you knew that. The point was that a change in brain chemistry can apparently cause pedophilia.

Tangent?
Again you’re blowing things out of proportion to try and discredit, but it’s not going to happen. That article represents one person. Just one. And he’s the only person ever recorded with the problem. It says so right in the article.

That being said? There’s no credible scientist that would be caught dead making a qualifying statement over ONE case.

Also, there’s no way of verifying, other than taking the word of a pedophile with a tumor in his brain, that the man didn’t have tendencies before the tumor. He also was convicted of molesting his step-daughter and would do anything to get out of jail, including a 12 step program for pedophiles - which he failed. Read the PDF. I did.


The frontal lobe controls a wide variety of high-level functions including motor behavior, problem solving, memory, language, judgment, decision making, social behavior, sexual behavior, motivation, and impulse control.
source

It is absolutely impossible, over one case study, to even begin to insinuate a tumor or damage to this area of his brain could ‘change’ sexual orientation. To increase it, to remove inhibitions? Rightly so. But to insinuate anything else is nothing but - sensationalist.

So, keep trying to discredit those who are not afraid to take a stand. Continue with your name calling and the 'Holier than thou' and 'overblown emotionalism' slander. Knock yourself out, cause it's not going to do any good.

Convicted pedophiles who act on their impulses and rape children need to be and must be removed from society for life.

It's a good thing we're headed in the right direction with 'Civil Commitment Centers'. Now if we can just change the 'three strike' rule, to a 'one strike' rule when person are convicted of child rape - society just might have a chance.

peace



posted on Dec, 8 2011 @ 03:54 AM
link   
Just to take a logical look at "the problem" of sex with a minor. It only lacks morality if it's rape. It's only against the law because the government says so.. It's not considered pedophilia if you are married (to the minor.) This is because it is not rape. The reason most early teens don't engage in sex on their own (which is a falsehood anyhow) is because society attempts to hide it from them entirely, and suppress their sexual desires (11 year old girls know touching themselves feels good and a whole lot of them do, even younger than that.) They aren't even told what it is until around 8-9 years old. And at that, it's usually some story book amalgamation that encrypts the real information within metaphor. (See: The birds and the bee's.)

It's human nature to be attracted to those that are ripe to bear healthy children. Before technology the average human lifespan was much shorter and as a consequence the birthing age was earlier (naturally, no evil required.) This means biologically you do not control who you are attracted too, and those you are attracted to is dictated by normal human nature. I.E. Most grown adult men find 14-17 year old women who are beautiful attractive. And this is totally normal as they are at their best health. They are told by the government it is wrong and so law abiders don't do anymore than look.

Restricting the acts of sex regardless of the will of the minor, and sheltering kids from what is natural, is what creates the conditions for the predators to exist. I.E. Having sex with "minors" was always a NORMAL part of society for centuries... Morals are relative to the society you are living in, and since it's against the law, the general consensus is that it's wrong.

Federal law doesn't restrict the age of consent. The states created the age of consent. Federal law offered protection against predators but allowed consensual sex with minors (and still does.) The states have the age of consent laws ranging from 16-18 which used to be 14-16. The majority of states has an age of consent set at 16 years old. So, in the greater portion of the US a 60 year old man is legally allowed to court a 16 year old girl. Most of you in here would see that as a problem or a reprehensible offense, however -- it's totally legal and not considered pedophilia.

The first Age of Consent law was in 1275 in Medieval England. It was made law to protect the chastity of women, since it was considered unfit to marry an already defiled woman. Also, if a woman was already defiled... it wasn't against the law to court her. It was only against the law to bed virgins under 12.


When the United States was founded the age of consent was 10 years old under common law. Since chastity was no longer an issue. We only recently raised the age restrictions... they were raised to 14-16, and now they are 16-18. The ONLY reason the law was raised was to combat teenage pregnancy. It wasn't because bedding a 14 year old girl is EVIL.

International ages of consent are currently set at 12 - 18. And again, it's only higher in places of higher concentrated teenage pregnancy. It's a measure of population control/unwanted children.

Again.... Not because it's evil or non-moral. The term pedophile is grossly twisted by the media... The definition is as follows;

paedophile or esp ( US ) pedophile (ˈpiːdəʊˌfaɪl)

— n
a person who is sexually attracted to children

The definition of child in this context is as follows;

child
   [chahyld] Show IPA
noun, plural chil·dren.

a baby or infant.

Pedophiles are evil. People having consensual sex with 10-17 year olds are not unless it's done forcibly against their will (which is not consensual.) If pregnancy is a non-issue (due to birth control) and both parties are Disease free, and it's not against the will of the minor, there is nothing wrong with it morally.

There are plenty of grown women who will tell you beautiful stories of their sex lives with older men at the age of 12. It does NOT "mess" up the psychology of the minor unless it's against their will.

So within this context it becomes very easy and clear to see why the elites dabble in underage sex... And it doesn't make it "morally evil" either unless it's against the will or exceeds superficial injury to the minor. (I.E. Broken Hymen.) Since they sit in their cushy place above the law they don't have to worry about the arbitrary law that was put into place to thwart teen pregnancy and control STD's.

However, bribing and manipulating for sex is evil for all ages.
edit on 8-12-2011 by Laokin because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 8 2011 @ 04:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by scotticus prime
reply to post by brilab45
 


brilab45,
I too know your pain. Unfortunately I am a male, and the stigma associated with such a violation is indeed a life long struggle. I was 12 years old when my brother a friend and myself happened upon people who were black and hated white people. This happened in the mid to late 60's during this country's racial unrest. I have been forever changed.

Later, as we were approaching home the three of us decided not to say anything about what happened. My friend was unable to hold his part of the deal. The police were called and the whole block watched the circus unfold. My friends dad was a vietnam vet and he was going nuts, screaming and waving his gun in the air as if he was trying to round up a possee. The three of us were taken to the coroners office only to be violated again, sperm samples from our private areas. In some way this was worse than the original event.

The real tragety in all of this is that my parents chose to never again speak of this matter. I am now 54 years old and am damaged goods. Unfeeling, uncaring and very cynical. I trust no person. I have not spoken to my brother in years. I rarly speak to my parents let alone see them, they live in another state.

I don't know about you but I was able to mask my pain growing up with alcohol and drugs. I really did not hit bottom until my mid forties. I did get therapy for a couple years and it did help me get all of the anger out My therapist specialized in PTSD (post traumatic stress disorder). Maybe you could look into that. I still am unable to really feel anything for anyone.

For some reason only God would know is that I was able to build a successful business. You see I had a really hard time relating to any of my bosses growing up. I was able to channel my anger by being a workacholic. I was really running from my past by submerging myself in work.

I believe that this happens to more kids than anyone really knows. Those of us violated this way would rather not let anyone know. We live with this dark pain that to people who were not violated cannot understand. We are somehow "broken". I know that if anyone would have done this to my children I would have without any doubt been consumed with blind rage. I know that deep down I would have brought my own style of justice. Thank God that they wern't, at least to my knowledge. They turned out to be very good kids. No indication of any traumatic experiences.

Most live life, we the violated endure life.





Man that's awful. However, you didn't get sick, you're not dead... just let it go dude. Nothing actually changed from that event. I've been car jacked by a bunch of colored men with guns with my very attractive girl friend in the passenger and fought for our lives. I was injured pretty badly however I won.

I could of let that event stop me from ever leaving the house again... but why? What's the point? I'm still alive, nothing changed from before that event to after that event in my life. Short of my physical healing time. Everything I had before I still had.... so did you. Sure there is embarrassment since police got involved and what have you, but really.... it's embarrassment like any other. With embarrassment you just have to forget about it.

Sure that event happened... but it ultimately has no effect on your life. The only way it can is if you just don't let it go. That's your problem... they aren't even responsible for that.
edit on 8-12-2011 by Laokin because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 8 2011 @ 04:14 AM
link   
reply to post by silo13
 


Originally posted by Astyanax
Obviously, not all paedophiles have brain tumours. But this case shows clearly that there is, or can be, a neurological component to paedophilia.

Perhaps you missed that line in my post.

Or perhaps you really are as enamoured of your own hatred as the tone of your recent posts in this thread suggests.

Either way, there is clearly no reasoning with you and I do not propose to try. I don’t doubt that cooler-headed, or simply more open-minded members than yourself will read what I have posted here and draw back from the fire.

*


reply to post by Afterthought
 


I'm having to laugh at the people who are still accusing me of starting and promoting a witch hunt. You couldn't be more wrong.


paedos

Just like ‘homos’, eh?


I rest my case.

*


reply to post by dbloch7986
 


I guess because I'm not a pedophile I can't really understand what goes on in their head.

I hope you don’t mean to imply that I am one. There seem to be a lot of accusations flying around here all of a sudden.

Incidentally, I think you’re wrong. I’m a writer by profession, and I have always known that the principal measure of an artist is his imaginative insight into minds and circumstances other than his own. Was Vladimir Nabokov a paedophile? He was certainly able to produce a detailed and absolutely compelling 300-plus-page account of the thoughts and behaviour of one – written in the first person, to boot. But even mentioning Lolita is probably enough to set off another fit of hysterics from the hatemongers, so I suppose we had better leave it there.



posted on Dec, 8 2011 @ 04:28 AM
link   
Abuse of a child, sexual or otherwise, is about the worst thing one human can do to another, or at least right up there among the very worst. Time is different in a child's mind, do you remember those eternal afternoons and how long it took to travel somewhere? Well, the bad stuff takes forever too, and then it stays forever.

Regardless of how you want to apportion the blame, that's a matter for philosophers. As a practical man, I think society as a whole would be better off simply euthanizing pedophiles via a quick and painless application of the death penalty. Whether you want to blame them personally or claim they are the products of abuse themselves is immaterial to me; I just think there should be provisions for removing these people from society, permanently and efficiently.
edit on 12/8/11 by silent thunder because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
24
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join