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.

 

How Is Our Society Creating These Monsters?

page: 3
6
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 09:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by britelite1971
That could very well be. I looked over the US crime statistics pretty well, and crime has definitely gone up over the years, but then so has the population.


Which populations within the population? Some have gone down, but I won't say more than that, lest someone have a fit.




posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 10:13 AM
link   

The so called women of the US can quit making
the prepubesent hairless body into an ideal.


This is absurd. The causal link is non existent. The highest rates of child abuse - ridiculous rates - in the world are found in South Africa, where the overwhelmingly black population hardly follows the trends in female pubic hair of America. This is a place where they have been known to gang rape infants. In Japan, on the other hand, where almost all the women are "natural", you can buy real child erotica on the level of FHM or Maxim and explicit animated "child porn" from a newsstand, yet abuse rates are comparatively low.

Furthermore, the lack of hair on female genitalia is not only nothing novel, it has been the aesthetic ideal for most of "Western" history. A glance at art from Classical Greece down to the Renaissance will confirm this.

In any case, if anything this tendency in female grooming is driven by male aesthetic tendencies, not vice versa. What sells is what people like. Men like to see and feel the female organ, not a clump of bushy hair. It has no more to do with paedophilia than sodomising a woman has to do with homosexuality (yes, I've heard that argument before too)



posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 10:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by britelite1971

In the nature vs. nurture debate, nature lost out a long time ago.


All of behavioural genetics disagrees with your Neo-lysenkoist claptrap.



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

Originally posted by britelite1971
Also, are there no child molesters or cases of incest in Japan and Korea? If your theory is correct, then there wouldn't be any there right?


Actually, incest is quite common in Japan, particularly involving mother and son. Some 80% of Japanese men have had sexual contact with their mothers. After all, mothers will still masturbate their young sons to but them to sleep, as used to happen in Europe once upon a time I believe. It just isn't viewed in the way we would view it. Who is surprised that Japanese manga and anime are full of this sort of thing, in which incest and paedophilia themes are something of a running joke. Still, abuse rates, or whatever constitutes abuse over there, are low.
edit on 29-12-2011 by PoeteMaudit because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 10:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by PoeteMaudit

Originally posted by britelite1971
That could very well be. I looked over the US crime statistics pretty well, and crime has definitely gone up over the years, but then so has the population.


Which populations within the population? Some have gone down, but I won't say more than that, lest someone have a fit.



I didn't really do an in depth study, so would be interested in hearing what you know about population changes. Not to worry about someone having a fit, that's going to happen anyway at some point....pretty much no matter what a person says.



posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 10:47 AM
link   
reply to post by PoeteMaudit
 


Awesome points! You really nailed that argument better than any of us on this thread so far. I thought the suggestion that female grooming habits in this country were to blame for child abuse was absurd to begin with, but you did an excellent job of point out why it is absurd.



posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 10:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by PoeteMaudit

Originally posted by britelite1971

In the nature vs. nurture debate, nature lost out a long time ago.


All of behavioural genetics disagrees with your Neo-lysenkoist claptrap.


I have to point this out. The nature vs nurture quote above is not mine. I was responding to someone else's reply, and quoted them in my reply. I'm not sure how that got screwed up along the way, but just wanted to point that out. In any case, I'm still in the "thinking" area on this. Can you explain your response on this? Perhaps in english for those of us who us who aren't as educated in this stuff as you are?



posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 11:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by antonia

How is society not to blame?


so·ci·e·ty/səˈsīətē/ Noun: The aggregate of people living together in a more or less ordered community. The community of people living in a particular region and having shared customs, laws, and organizations.


No one is born broken, no one is born with knowledge. No one can be "born" anything ...


You're right. You are an idiot. This is all gross oversimplification if not utterly fallacious.

You're right that if one does not water an apple seed it will never become an apple tree, but a rabbit will stay a rabbit, and no matter how you raise it, nurture it, feed it or bend it, it will never turn into a fox. Like all organisms, plant or animal, human ones too have a biological existence which is formed and modulated through a genetic inheritance, and inheritance which is never identical from one organism to another. There are no tabula rasa, no blank slates. THere are not equal and idnentical humans either. Every organism is born with behaviours, drives and dispotions, not only peculiar to its species, but peculiar to itself, and will continue to develop these as it grows according to its own genetic blueprint. To say that we are born without "knowledge", that is, the memory of experience and the conceptualisation of it, does not evidence your point, not only because it presumes what it is supposed to establish, that this sort of knowledge determines behaviour, but since the mechanisms through, through which the world is experienced, which this occurs are largely genetically determined.

Yes, Mrs Popp had to train for many a year to sing as she does. It does not follow, however, from this that every person could sing as Mrs Popp given enough training. Every voice has its unique tone, its unique sound, determined by the - unique - vocal chords, the shape of the oral cavity, the natural movements of the tongue and lips etc. and yes, most of them are not at all suited to singing Mozart. It's what we call talent, and every teacher of every art knows that it can't be taught. Or , if you please miss, why don't you go and teach a tone-deaf child to sing Mary Had a Little Lamb without accompaniment. Like you can teach a colorblind child to distinguish red from green, right? For god's sake, the mere fact that young choir boys used to be castrated to keep them singing as wanted beyond the biological reality of puberty and the changes it induces in the male voice nullifies your "nurture" argument. The only thing "profoundly false" here is your philosphical naivete and your, frankly, ridiculous straw man, I quote,

"Mrs. Popp cannot sing this rather difficult aria because she was born to do so. If that was the case she would never have had to learn it, Mozart would never have had to write it."

What's more, I'll tell you that no matter how many years Mrs Popp trained she'd never be a Mozart. There are schools full of aspiring composers, going through a process more rigorous and absorbing , yet none of them able even to compose a melody so beautiful as the minuet the genius gave to us when he was but five years of age. What was it that set Mozart apart from others in his family of musicians? Training? Nurture? Why can't that fellow who trains every day in the gym box like Ali? Why won't that Japanese boy who has been forcefed mathematics every day and night since he has yea high ever become a Newton?



Now run on back to la la land.
edit on 29-12-2011 by PoeteMaudit because: (no reason given)

edit on 29-12-2011 by PoeteMaudit because: (no reason given)

edit on 29-12-2011 by PoeteMaudit because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 11:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by britelite1971
I have to point this out. The nature vs nurture quote above is not mine.


Editing mistake. Apologies.



posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 11:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by PoeteMaudit

Originally posted by britelite1971
Also, are there no child molesters or cases of incest in Japan and Korea? If your theory is correct, then there wouldn't be any there right?


Actually, incest is quite common in Japan, particularly involving mother and son. Some 80% of Japanese men have had sexual contact with their mothers. After all, mothers will still masturbate their young sons to but them to sleep, as used to happen in Europe once upon a time I believe. It just isn't viewed in the way we would view it. Who is surprised that Japanese manga and anime are full of this sort of thing, in which incest and paedophilia themes are something of a running joke. Still, abuse rates, or whatever constitutes abuse over there, are low.
edit on 29-12-2011 by PoeteMaudit because: (no reason given)


That is so bizarre! I had no idea! It is so odd that in this country what would get one arrested is a culturally accepted practice in another.



posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 11:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by britelite1971

Originally posted by PoeteMaudit

Originally posted by britelite1971

In the nature vs. nurture debate, nature lost out a long time ago.


All of behavioural genetics disagrees with your Neo-lysenkoist claptrap.

I'm not sure how that got screwed up along the way, but just wanted to point that out. In any case, I'm still in the "thinking" area on this. Can you explain your response on this? Perhaps in english for those of us who us who aren't as educated in this stuff as you are?


Well, you could start with reading popular works in this vein like Steven Pinker's The Blank Slate and Thornhill and Palmer's A Natural History of Rape: Biological Bases of Sexual Coercion. The bibliographies would lead you from there, or a simple Google Books search.

The bottom line is that there is no single factor, either of nature or nurture, explaining all cases. What is true for one may not be true for another, but, it must be said and kept in mind, nature will determine the effects of nurture, as important as it may be. That much should be obvious. But life is, at the end of the day, of a richness that cannot be conceptualised and predicted by even the most complex of systems.
edit on 29-12-2011 by PoeteMaudit because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 11:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by CherubBaby
The progression often goes something like this. Pornagrphy, More Pornagraphy, child porn, or beastiality, and then even rape or kill flicks. I am not saying that everyone that watches porn ends up at the end of the list. I am saying that those who do wind up in the news for the horrific.offenses like these and craigs list killer etc didn't start full boar as far as the exposure they had to porn . It was a gradual step..
edit on 27-12-2011 by CherubBaby because: (no reason given)


Very true. Of course, the question is, what makes the difference? Two persons can follow the same route and yet diverge at some point. My answer, the only answer I find consistent, is nature.



posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 11:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by britelite1971
reply to post by CherubBaby
 


You are so right. I have seen things before about how these things progress. S/F for that awesome answer to my post.
Would it be correct to say then that as a person progresses from a beginning level of say like child porn to more hardcore child porn, etc., that it seems less bad to them as they progress? For instance, I once heard a serial killer say on a show that the more people that he killed, the easier it became. Does any of that make sense?


They become "numb" to it. They go after this sort of thing for the sexual thrill that debauchery brings, which eventually wears off, and so they need something even more insane to "get off".



posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 11:59 AM
link   
reply to post by notonsamepage
 
What I'm trying to say is depending on whether it's nurture or nature you'll get very different monsters. Those messed up by people, nurture, are usually pretty dysfunctional and easily spotted/avoided. I firmly believe genetics plays a role when monsters choose to construct a persona, nature. They are disciplined, conniving and for the most part they feel it's their birth right, they don't self loathe.

Those like the BTK killer are caught because of their arrogance/confidence not because of any visible dysfunction. Some are more skilled and never get caught. Imo there's more going on with them than past abuse. Something entirely different is happening in their brain making them the most deadly of all. You'll never see them coming until it's too late.



posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 12:05 PM
link   
This isn't a popular thing to say. Thats ok I never wanted to be popular anyway. But if your correct in that 80% of japanese men have had incestual relations with their mothers/ masutrbated by them for sleep etc. Its no wonder that the earth rattles and tsunami's flood that country and judgement is served.



posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 12:30 PM
link   
reply to post by britelite1971
 


Watch "They Live".

Now, as crazy as this sounds and it's totally off the wall - I didn't pick my ATS name nor location lightly.

I wonder (not believe, not positive, I said I wonder, I ponder) that just maybe, possibly just because someone looks human, maybe they either aren't really totally human or the empathy part of their brain is either missing or damaged or they are possessed with either some call them demons, I like to think in quantum physics terms of other dimensional beings?????

I did a post called Why? Someone on purpose threw a beautiful, sweet, kind, innocent dog out the window to get run over www.abovetopsecret.com...



JonBenét Ramsey, Caylee Anthony, the 8-10 million dogs and cats we exterminate each year and render them into our pet food (yes, research that one), the tens of millions of orphans now in Iraq, child slavery, the list goes on and on............and we keep allowing most of our money to be put into the military because TPTB keep manipulating us with fear and hate.

How and why?

Several reasons I think. Psychopaths have been allowed to run the planet and possibly and again as nutzo as this sounds, maybe, just possibly not all of us that appear human are totally human. Maybe some of us are possessed by something that isn't quite human.

If not and these "monsters" are totally human, than Homo sapien is in need of a serious upgrade.
edit on 29-12-2011 by ofhumandescent because: grammar.

edit on 29-12-2011 by ofhumandescent because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 12:40 PM
link   
reply to post by CherubBaby
 


I dated a Japanese boy in highschool, our foreign exchange student and he never said anything about that.......we were only friends but talked deeply about many things.

Don't judge or make comments unless you really really know first hand.........that is malicious gossip.

Now, any Japanese males out there care to elaborate or discuss if this is true?

And, if you go to Japan, they are some of the nicest people. They don't have the violent crime rate we in America do.



posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 12:44 PM
link   
reply to post by PoeteMaudit
 


Petting my dog, a candle light bath soak with a glass of Merlot wine, a good book, my husband............I guess I'm easily amused.

Still cannot wrap my brain around anyone getting off on being cruel??????

And many humans, far too many seem to get off on it.

Personally, I think a major conspiracy are the violent video games - they are numbing our youth into advancing and splattering the enemy like in war..............not good.

And yes, I really see a giant conspiracy both in the rise of movie, TV and video game violence desensitizing us to violence.



posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 05:46 PM
link   
reply to post by PoeteMaudit
 


Very well explained and in English too.
. Thank you! That may well be the best explanation of the whole nature vs. nurture issue that I've heard yet. Einstein is that you?



posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 06:14 PM
link   
reply to post by ofhumandescent
 


Wow! That's horrible about Holly! Seriously, I don't know how someone could do that to an animal! It seems like those that are most often victims are the most innocent of us, the children, the handicapped, the elderly and the animals. There is something seriously wrong inside of people that hurt others. It would be nice to think that we could fix our twisted society, but I think that's a long time in coming, if ever. For those that justify hurting animals by saying they don't have a soul, they are very wrong. Anyone who has ever been attached to their pet knows that they do have souls.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join