Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

" WITCH .............she is a witch " ooops , appologies - wrong century " "PEADOPHILE .....he i

page: 5
14
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 02:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Todzer
 


Arrested is one thing, but doesn't mean squat untill it's being prosecuted in the courts. I'm also going to go with a cover up, they'll hang an old has bean or two out to dry and then carry in as normal. Anyone expecting someone high up in society to be prosecuted is living in a fantasy world

Does anyone really think things like 'fagging' at boarding schools and the like is going to stop, of course not.




posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 03:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by Timely
 


That's exactly the mentality that he's talking about. No one is saying hide them, or that it's ok. It's that the "weed them out and burn them!" mentality is getting to the point where people are almost afraid to look at someone wrong, because they're going to get accused. And once you're accused they'll come after you with pitchforks.

I was almost a victim of this, just from trying to be nice to my sister in law's daughter. We were at a Halloween thing that her family does every year. The kids were off playing, and we noticed that the other kids were being mean to her daughter and picking on her, because they were a little older. The other kids went off together, leaving her alone. My wife and I went and played with her for a few minutes, before my wife got tired. I played with her a little longer, and tried to make her feel like not everyone was going to be mean to her.

A couple of months later, we were almost homeless, and asked her sister to let us stay with them. She let us stay for a day or two, but made up some excuse about not staying long because of the kids, and her not being comfortable with me there, since she barely new me. We just kind of passed it off, until a couple of years later. Come to find out, she was telling everyone that she knew that I was a pedophile, and she was convinced that I was after her daughter, because I paid too much attention to her that Halloween.

I was damn lucky that it didn't go any farther than her family, but she could easily have gone to the police and launched an investigation that would have destroyed my life. Once a rumor of even being investigated for that got out, I would have never been able to find a job, and would have had to leave the town we lived in.

THAT is what we want to see stopped. No one is trying to cover for anyone, and no one is trying to suppress the victims here. Just stop the damn witch hunts when someone looks too long at someone.
edit on 12-11-2012 by Timely because: (no reason given)
edit on 12-11-2012 by Timely because: Sorry hit the wrong button.



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 03:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Timely
 


Sorry, wrecked that reply.

I am not referring to ' witch hunts ' just facts, as supplied by victims of a major unaccounted for child sexual abuse network.

Hopefully this will gain traction with all of the thinking Mums and Dads, who hope to make a difference in their kids' upbringing.

( there is no room for paedophiles in this picture ! )

Or is there!?? If so ... please justify ...
edit on 12-11-2012 by Timely because: you can not be serious !!!



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 04:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rubic0n

Originally posted by newcovenant
reply to post by ignorant_ape
 


Only difference is there is no such thing as witches and never was.
There is such a thing as pedophiles.

Fact is, they are sometimes people you pass everyday and would never suspect.
They should be ferreted out, brought into the light of day and punished for it.

edit on 11-11-2012 by newcovenant because: (no reason given)


Does not matter. Back then they truly believed in witches and the social response and behavior was still the same. Whether there were or were not witches is irrelevant.

It was quite the thing back then, now we have a new thing , same behavior.
The point the OP is making is social psychology and behavior which does indeed not seem to have changed much in that regard.


No they didn't. The medical establishment was trying to get rid of midwives and leave the medical treatment to men who had gone through the same schooling to standardize medicine. It was a con that took advantage of peoples fears to illicit a desired response. Here they are trying to catch pedophiles. I understand where you and the OP are trying to go with this but these two comparisons are not really accurate or similar at all.
edit on 12-11-2012 by newcovenant because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 04:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Raelsatu

Originally posted by newcovenant
reply to post by ignorant_ape
 


Fact is, they are sometimes people you pass everyday and would never suspect.
They should be ferreted out, brought into the light of day and punished for it.


So anyone with a psychiatric disorder should be ferreted out and punished? Many people automatically connect the mental disorder of pedophilia directly with acting out on it (child molestation). When that's simply not the case. A large number of people have strange sexual preferences, fetishes, or perversions; many of which are considered repulsive -- Which I would agree with. Attraction to children, sadism, rape fantasies -- only a few examples.

The clear line here is whether or not these people act out on their desires and impulses. The separation between 'thought crime' and actual crime. A psychopath doesn't ask for their mental condition, but they must still cope with it; so long as they don't let their lack of certain emotions wreck havoc on others.

Unfortunately, instead of the money being spent on exposing these human trafficking rings; it goes to causing pain, destruction, endless guilty pleasures, & extreme opulence for the most amoral humans on the planet. It's sad.
edit on 12-11-2012 by Raelsatu because: (no reason given)



Although you make a tender case for poor, poor pedophiles who are largely misunderstood and simply suffering an unfortunate mental heath disorder - I am still going to say they should be brought out into the open and punished.

Ideally we could catch these disorders in people by examining or profiling them before harm can come to another person but that is difficult.

That last sentence...troubles me.
What money are you talking about? This involves investigation and effort - not cash.
But even if it did - why again is this "money" you speak of better spent elsewhere? Opulence bothers you far more than pedophilia or the effort to stop it? Strange indeed.



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 04:43 AM
link   
reply to post by ignorant_ape
 


Brilliant post, i could not agree more.

Every one is so quick to condemn without a shred of evidence, you can only hope they are never in a similar position in reality.



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 04:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by pandaski
one thing i do find amazing about this new witch hunt is it seems a lot easier to accouse the dead, they cant defened themsleves, i have no doubt the jimmy saville and many others did abbhorant things to children, but i find it kind of strange that they waited for so long to come forward and tell there story,
or was it when they heard the word "compensation"
news international are having a massive witch hunt against the BBC for one reason and one reason only, it was the BBC that led the witch hunt against news international for there role in the phone hacking situation


No...

The reason they didn't come forward was simple, some had and were treated like criminals by the authorities and the BBC, how dare they accuse Saint Jimmy, king of TV and charity. Many of the others simply found it easier to come forward once that disgusting old pervert was dead, ie its easier to tell your story when the same man who did it to you ISN'T sitting there smiling at you and calling you a liar..

Other will have come forward simply because some brave soul started the trend.

Jimmy Savile was a nasty little man (I met him and can confirm his way with people) who used his celebrity to molest, he was protected by the BBC and others in power.

As for coming forward for compensation, maybe a few will, it would be very sad if that was the case but I doubt that is why most people came forward.
edit on 12-11-2012 by Mclaneinc because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 05:52 AM
link   
reply to post by newcovenant
 


Punished for what? Being a pedophile is not, and cannot be illegal.....
People need to stop referring to pedophiles as child molesters for one. There is a difference.



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 06:03 AM
link   
reply to post by DENBY
 


Again, all of those are exact examples of the propaganda spread by those who support pedophilia.



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 06:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by BlueAjah
reply to post by DENBY
 


Again, all of those are exact examples of the propaganda spread by those who support pedophilia.


Support paedophilia? Are you completely insane


No-one is supporting it mate, these people are sick and society has to deal with them somehow. What do you propose, go back to the dark ages and kill them? What Denby said is pretty accurate.



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 06:41 AM
link   
reply to post by Timely
 


And all that is being referred to here is witch hunts. No one is trying to justify anything. If a person has been PROVEN to be a pedophile, and broken the law, burn them. If not, then let the law handle it FIRST.



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 07:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by newcovenant

Originally posted by Raelsatu

Originally posted by newcovenant
reply to post by ignorant_ape
 


Fact is, they are sometimes people you pass everyday and would never suspect.
They should be ferreted out, brought into the light of day and punished for it.


So anyone with a psychiatric disorder should be ferreted out and punished? Many people automatically connect the mental disorder of pedophilia directly with acting out on it (child molestation). When that's simply not the case. A large number of people have strange sexual preferences, fetishes, or perversions; many of which are considered repulsive -- Which I would agree with. Attraction to children, sadism, rape fantasies -- only a few examples.

The clear line here is whether or not these people act out on their desires and impulses. The separation between 'thought crime' and actual crime. A psychopath doesn't ask for their mental condition, but they must still cope with it; so long as they don't let their lack of certain emotions wreck havoc on others.

Unfortunately, instead of the money being spent on exposing these human trafficking rings; it goes to causing pain, destruction, endless guilty pleasures, & extreme opulence for the most amoral humans on the planet. It's sad.
edit on 12-11-2012 by Raelsatu because: (no reason given)



Although you make a tender case for poor, poor pedophiles who are largely misunderstood and simply suffering an unfortunate mental heath disorder - I am still going to say they should be brought out into the open and punished.


^This is a prime example and result of having been conditioned on how to think or better said, not to think beyond a set indoctrinated idea.

I was once a bit like you but not to that extend i admit.
I have a aunt who is a psychiatrist and sexual abnormalities is her specialism. We have talked about this subject on several occasions including the "witch hunt" behavior since that is the trend these last years. It may not make me a expert by any stretch but it added a lot of new perspectives on the matter for me.


A pedophile has done nothing illegal unless you want to count being born a offense. Most pedophiles never act on it. A small portion of them does , it is quite easy to verify this for yourself if you like. All you have to do is do a search on any search engine.

So what you are purposing is to "punish" ? anyone in society just based on a suspicion and without them having done anything in the first place (they usually do not advertise their sexual preferences in the newspapers).
Base jumping from a building in newyork is illegal but maybe you have entertained the idea ever since you where little , should we arrest and punish you now ?

So , who are we going to punish next for having criminal thoughts that has yet to commit a crime?
Or do we only act like brainless hooligans under the protection of the " save teh childrenz" banner ?

What about :

Murderers
"Regular" rapists
Bank robbers (they kill people too you know , potentially even children)
Child murderers! (i havent seen you mention those yet)

Where does this end. Or do we only limit this to pedophiles?
Do you really purpose to predetermine if anyone should be punished based on, well, nothing really.
Sounds a bit like "Pre-crime" in a certain steven spielberg movie but worse even,

It is insanity and it stems form the FEAR you are conditioned to have. A compulsive fixated fear like this leads to insane ideas and behavior. WWII would make a fine example for this, everyone in germany feared everyone and everything they were told to fear and suppress it ,which they did. Same mentality, different scale.

I would be afraid to think if i were to live in a society that lives by following your narrow minded mindset (im sorry for saying that. I am not out to insult but i do not know how else to express it)




Ideally we could catch these disorders in people by examining or profiling them before harm can come to another person but that is difficult.


That would mean "screening" every single person that is born into our societies just to see if they could be a pedophile?

It would be a lot more then difficult if you ask me.
Immoral and scary spring to mind in my case.Not to mention open for abuse and corruption.
1984

In some countries it is still illegal to be gay and people today are being executed for it (punished) even if it was just a accusation. Lets say they are just being imprisoned for it (punished) ,I would ask you if you agree with this but i wont because you already purposed the idea yourself.


TL;DR:

People who talk like you are to be feared as much as the ones you tell us to fear.


Peace V
edit on 12-11-2012 by Rubic0n because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 08:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by newcovenant
 


Punished for what? Being a pedophile is not, and cannot be illegal.....
People need to stop referring to pedophiles as child molesters for one. There is a difference.

I have to ask...because I know you usually have good points in your posts even if they can be a little hard to understand at first. Like this one.

What is the difference between a Peadophile and a Child Molester? If we're talking the Romeo and Juliet examples of 20yr vs. 16yr or that kind of thing...it's totally different than what I'd think of. Did you mean something else?



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 08:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


A pedophile simply means a sexual attraction. A child molester or rapist might also be a pedophile, but that is not the reason they were arrested. They were arrested for the illegal action of harming another person. Does that make better sense?

There are some sick people out there that would rape a kid, or an old lady with dimensia, or whoever they could and thought they could get away with it. So a child rapist doesn't necessarily have to be a pedophile.

For the record, I would never advocate that it was OK that a kid was harmed. That is a crime as it should be. Thinking about something cannot ever be illegal. We have all thought about committing violence before, maybe even murder, what matters is if you go and do it, or control the impulse. That is what separates me from the guy who actually went on a rampage killing people. Impulse control.
edit on Mon, 12 Nov 2012 08:45:19 -0600 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 08:45 AM
link   
reply to post by TKDRL
 

That's an interesting way of putting that... Hmm.. I say that because in looking at medical, legal and standard dictionaries I don't see it worded quite that way. Certainly not how I've thought of it...... So you're defining the line as separating fantasy from action in what defines one from the other?



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 08:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 



Pedophilic Disorder
A. Over a period of at least 6 months, an equal or greater sexual arousal from prepubescent or early pubescent children than from physically mature persons, as manifested by fantasies, urges, or behaviors.

B. The individual has acted on these sexual urges, or the sexual urges or fantasies cause marked distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning.

C. The individual must be at least 18 years of age and at least 5 years older than the children in Criterion A.

Specify type:

Classic Type—Sexually Attracted to Prepubescent Children (Tanner Stage 1)

Hebephilic Type—Sexually Attracted to Early Pubescent Children (Tanner Stages 2-3)

Pedohebephilic Type—Sexually Attracted to Both



Specify type:

Sexually Attracted to Males

Sexually Attracted to Females

Sexually Attracted to Both


That is from the DSM V, basically it seems like they are trying to end the "witch hunt" as well.
It is only a diagnosed disorder if it harms others, or has negative consequences on their life.


One of the first questions addressed by the Paraphilias Subworkgroup was whether all paraphilias are ipso facto mental disorders. We took the position that they are not. We therefore proposed that the DSM-5 make a distinction between paraphilias and Paraphilic Disorders, as described below.

A Paraphilic Disorder is a paraphilia that is currently causing distress or impairment to the individual or a paraphilia whose satisfaction has entailed personal harm, or risk of harm, to others in the past. A paraphilia is a necessary but not a sufficient condition for having a Paraphilic Disorder, and a paraphilia by itself does not automatically justify or require clinical intervention.

It was possible to implement the distinction between paraphilias and Paraphilic Disorders without making any changes to the basic structure of the diagnostic criteria as they had existed since DSM-III-R. In the diagnostic criteria set for each of the listed Paraphilic Disorders, Criterion A specifies the qualitative nature of the paraphilia (e.g., an erotic focus on children or on exposing the genitals to strangers), and Criterion B specifies the negative consequences of the paraphilia (distress, impairment, or harm—or risk of harm—to others).

The change proposed for DSM-5 is that individuals who meet both Criterion A and Criterion B would now be diagnosed as having a Paraphilic Disorder. The word diagnosis would not be used in regard to individuals who meet Criterion A but not Criterion B, that is, individuals who have a paraphilia but not a Paraphilic Disorder. If an individual meets only Criterion A for a particular paraphilia—a circumstance that might arise when a benign paraphilia is discovered during the clinical investigation of some other condition—then the act of noting or reporting that the individual acknowledges the paraphilia should be referred to as ascertainment rather than diagnosis. Usage of the term ascertainment does not mean that an additional or a special step has been added to clinical assessment. It is simply a convenient way of avoiding the inappropriate word diagnosis when the individual has a paraphilia but not a Paraphilic Disorder.

Not the easiest stuff for sure, but psychology never is


Someone could be a pedophile their whole life, and never lay a hand on a kid in a sexual manner. Same as someone can be gay, but live their whole life without ever acting on it.



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 09:15 AM
link   
reply to post by TKDRL
 

Hmm.. I appreciate the reply. The DSM is one I hadn't gone off to check although that is basically the Bible for defining these things.

I see your point and it's perfectly valid. Those whose job it is to define such things say there is a very bright line between fantasy and action. That's fair enough.....although you have to admit, the common and general use of the word by normal people isn't intending or acknowledging the distinction.


Honestly in real terms that matter? I'm not sure how we ought to handle that as a society. Maybe you're right...as much as the nature of this topic just rubs me as wrong as anything can....it does come down to a real sticky issue if action hasn't been taken, doesn't it? It crosses into Pre-Crime or even Thought crime territory and we're never supposed to be about that last leap into tyranny. What a messy messy topic to have to be the example on it though.

*Oh.. grats on your new Avatar BTW... I like this Mogwai better than the flaming arrow one.


edit on 12-11-2012 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 09:23 AM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 

It is an extremely hard topic to discuss, or even think about rationally. I love kids and the thought of anyone hurting kids makes my blood start boiling. They are basically defenseless, the only way they can stop it is to tell someone. Kids are also impressionable, which is why so many victims of abuse can be manipulated into thinking it was their fault somehow, or intimidated into not telling. Child abuse is one of the lowest things a person can do, it is absolutely disgusting, I am sure we all agree on that much.



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 09:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


I detest any attempts to Police people's thoughts. Can you imagine what sort of scary world it would be if it was allowed? Next time someone cuts you up whilst driving and you (in your head) line them up with your laser and zap.........."oh sorry, officer, didn't realise i couldn't blow them up in my head".

As far as i am concerned, people can think about whatever they like, however sick i may find it. If those thoughts cross over into action in reality, well then a line has been crossed and those people would need punishing. But for thinking? N'ah, curse not. Apart from anything, there would millions and millions of online gamers to imprison for committing mass murder on a daily basis!
edit on 12-11-2012 by Flavian because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 10:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by ignorant_ape
as the title says :

" WITCH .............she is a witch " ooops , appologies - wrong century " "PEADOPHILE .....he is a peadophile "

the last months events in the UK have only served to cement my opinion that the base psychology of the " general pubic " [ not a spelling mistake ] has not advanced by very much since the 18th century

" he is a peadophile " really has replaced " she is a witch "

and despite 300 years of " advancement " - the 2 accusations are thrown about with the same disregard to evidence , due proces or logic

and dont get me started on all the idiots now coming forward with " proof " that they knew of peadohile activity dating back betweeen 45 and 10 years ago



What is it that you're trying to say? Not trying to be a smart-(donkey), I just don't understand what your post is saying. Are you saying that there aren't actually pedophiles, that people accused of pedophila are never really pedophiles? And what are the events in the UK? Could you explain more what the point you're trying to make is?






top topics



 
14
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join