Lawmakers consider chemical castration for pedophiles

reply to post by AngryOne




If you had READ my reply post to AIM646 ( post prior to the last one) - you will see that i

am NOT confused. I am FULLY AWARE. You will note that in my post i pointed out

pedophiles are not interested in children past puberty, and child molestation referred to

children under the age of consent as laid down by the law.


And You shouldn't make assumptions although i find if difficult to comprehend i am FULLY

aware that there are a small percentage of female abusers.

reply to post by eletheia


I'm still trying to get over Aim64C's first post on Page 3. I mean....wtf.

Anyway, understand that I am not trying to sound like a smartass or anything, ma'am. It's just that your stated belief that there's "no such thing as a non-offending pedophile" is rather ludicrous. And tbh, I am indeed having a rather difficult time following you.

And in regards to the last part of your post, just why do you find it so "difficult to comprehend"?

reply to post by AngryOne




How do you define a NON offending pedophile ?

As a woman a mother and a grandmother and all the women mothers and grandmothers

that i know the overwhelming feelings to love nurture and protect children, makes it very

difficult for me (us) to comprehend how a female can inflict ANY type of abuse on a child .

reply to post by eletheia


First, some constructive criticism: Please work on your typing. I can hardly understand what you're trying to say and I'm sure that I'm not the only one.

Now to answer your question, a "non-offending pedophile" is just that: A pedophile who does not offend.
In other words, someone who deals with those thoughts but does not act on them.
And btw, not all child molesters are pedophiles (I don't know the exact numbers but supposedly, MOST of them aren't).

As for the other part of your post...understood. But is the idea of a woman doing this type of thing REALLY so different than the idea of a man doing it?

reply to post by AngryOne
[mor



Firstly i don't see what my TYPING has to do with CONTENT. Typing - hit the correct keys

and 'viola' you get the words you want. You may not understand what i am saying but i have

been on ATS somewhat longer than you and no one has complained of not understanding me

before.

Your second point, would it follow that we are all 'murderers' but 'non offending murderers'

because we do not act on it?

Thirdly i have already made the point TWICE that 'pedophiles' interest is in prepubscent children

and 'child molesters' referred to abusers of children below the age of consent as laid down by

the law.

And finally however good a parent a man makes - A woman carries a child for 9 months, gives

birth ( something a man will never do or understand) and then nurtures the child till able to

fend for itself. I think somewhere in that bonding process (hormonal chemistry) makes the

woman a natural nurturer. That is why i find it SO difficult to comprehend female abusers.




Whilst signing off the word troll comes to mind

reply to post by eletheia

Thirdly i have already made the point TWICE that 'pedophiles' interest is in prepubscent children

Yeah, exactly. And just what would you call it when it is not acted on?
If they don't act on it, they are not "offenders"; if they are not offenders, they are "NON-OFFENDING PEDOPHILES."
Pedophilia, in and of itself, has to do with thoughts and feelings, not actions. Do you understand now?

And I simply do not appreciate accusations of "trolling". Just HOW am I "trolling"?
Please relax, ma'am.

reply to post by SpeachM1litant


They would have to also remove their arms and legs, as well as sew their mouths shut and insert a feeding tube, I have been molested as a young girl so I know that it is not always the penis that is used to hurt children.

What we need is the real science available today to remove the genetic mutations which lead to this type of behavior, and while they are at it many other diseases such as cancer could be taken out.

reply to post by SpaceFoetus

Careful, you're letting your prejudice show. Pedophiles do have a mental disorder, but they also know what they are doing is wrong. That's why they go to extraordinary lengths to hide what they are doing. If you had children and something happened, would you be so forgiving and hope the court just put them in an institution ? Probably not. You would be just like us duhhh Americans and want to inflict as much harm as possible. It's called Justice and they deserve it.

I really don’t think medical science fully understands why pedophiles choose to offend. I get a little uncomfortable when people automatically assume pedophiles have themselves been sexually abused as children. Often defense attorneys play this card to garner sympathy for their clients. It sounds good and juries tend to believe it. I think this mind set does a great injustice to the many survivors of childhood sexual abuse who never harm another person. Survivors often inflict abuse/punishment on themselves not others.

I have to question whether such people in fact were ever sexually abused and not simply looking for legal loopholes to excuse their sociopath behavior. There is a pedophile in my family. Sexual abuse is a weak persons attempt at power and control. The victims of choice are usually those who are most vulnerable. In other words they seek out an easy target and sexual assault is often the most heinous way they can deliver their brand of pain. Let’s say sexual assault gives them more bang for their buck.

The sick individual in my family has many outlets for his violence. He has physically and sometimes sexually abused women, children, weaker men, animals, insects, authority figures the list goes on. He is by my definition a sociopath. Sexual abuse is only one aspect of his nature. Do I believe he was sexually abused as a child? Possibly but I don’t honestly know. I do know he was very young when he began showing symptoms of a sociopath and nothing was done to correct his behavior. Instead he was nurtured within the family unit. First he was just mean bullying everyone that led to physical violence and disruptive behavior. He was given a free pass for violence. He felt superior to all others.

Sadly I don’t think there is an easy answer but to automatically assume sexual abuse of children will turn them into abusive adults is not the complete picture. Victims often remain victims their whole life if not given treatment. Imo abusers have been coddled, nurtured, excused first within the family then they are set loose on society. I feel strongly that they are sociopaths first. Victims often learn to be victims at a young age, likewise abusers learn to abuse at a young age.

Originally posted by illuminatitanimulli
Physical castration is better.
Execution is the best .

Yep, not only physical castration, they should have their penis removed so another child will not get raped by them. I am so sicken by these people who like to do this to kids.

reply to post by Chopper

I completely understand your response and on the surface it would seem like an easy fix but what about female pedophiles? Imo that's society's real dirty little secret. Women often play a role in the sexual abuse of children. Many women don't actively participate but will allow or condone this behavior. Google sexual abuse/incest amongst the Amish.

For whatever reason some women choose to look the other way. Later they might plead ignorance but I don't buy it. Imo any woman who would allow a suspected abuser around her children is contributory and should be prosecuted. At the very least they should never be allowed unsurpervised custody of a child. It would be a hard thing to prove but I assure you it's real and goes on more often than most care to believe.

reply to post by AngryOne

I'm still trying to get over Aim64C's first post on Page 3. I mean....wtf.

It helps to ask questions.

reply to post by eletheia

And finally however good a parent a man makes - A woman carries a child for 9 months, gives

birth ( something a man will never do or understand) and then nurtures the child till able to

fend for itself. I think somewhere in that bonding process (hormonal chemistry) makes the

woman a natural nurturer. That is why i find it SO difficult to comprehend female abusers.

I don't really see why it should be difficult to comprehend. The essence of abuse is control. It is odd for people to get angry because something goes their way - anger is almost always a result of something not going as planned or expected. The difference is how one uses this anger. People like myself, naturally manipulative, will get angry and begin to try and manipulate another person into doing what we want. When I'm angry at someone - their emotions and feelings are not sacred things to be protected, they are tools to be used to get the outcome I want.

I first really became aware of how this part of my mind worked about a year ago (well, a little longer). My father passed away and my girlfriend decided to be in a relationship with another person... without really changing things with me... I'm an idealist and a dreamer - a lot of my dreams and goals in life included her in the future... and having my dad (the only remaining parent of mine) pass away suddenly... I found I was capable of doing things I never imagined, and am not too proud of.

It's a part of myself I have to remain aware of. I like knowing as much as possible, and I don't like it when my plans go awry (it's honestly a bit childish).

This is not, at all, gender (or sex) specific. Since - I've noticed the behavior in other people, as well, to different extremes and with their own personality quirks. Women can seek to control just as much as men can. The more you care about something - the more you plan on it happening - the easier it is to replace the people you care about with the plan you had for them.

Of course - that is one form of abuse. It comes in many forms. The point is - an abusive person is not in a normal/healthy state of mind. Expecting relationships and other sentiments to have value to someone in such chaotic states is pretty silly.

reply to post by AngryOne





pedophilia.askdefine.com...

Dictionary defination.....sexual activity of an adult with a child


Further down the page....Extensive Defination - second paragraph:-

In common usage, the term pedophile refers to an adult who is sexually attracted to

children, WHETHER OR NOT THE ADULT ACT UPON THAT ATTRACTION by sexually

abusing a child.


Many pedophiles claim innocence because they 'only watch videos of abuse' - well they

are just as guilty because every video they watch some poor child had to suffer in the

making of it

reply to post by Aim64C

Indeed. It (the post in question, and you know precisely what part I'm referring to) is creepy, but relevant.
So perhaps you could try yet again to explain to Eletheia just what the difference is between a child molester and a pedophile? Because she clearly DOESN'T get it, and I am getting nowhere with this.

i could write a long post on the benefits of pedophiles being put down
i could talk about chemical castration as regards androcur/cyprostat which is often touted as a pedo cure all (falsely)
as it only blocks androgen and not testosterone.
i could address the fact i was an abused child abused by a FEMALE because i was an intersex child!
but i wont bother since the majority of a.t.s. dont want first hand knowledge they want suppostion inuendo and fake youtube vids!

THE FACT IS ALL CHILD ABUSERS ARE SICK AND DEMENTED
CHEMICAL CASTRATION DOES NOT WORK
NOT ALL ABUSED KIDS GROW UP TO ABUSE!
anyone who abuses anyone and gives them being abused as a reason ARE NOT VICTIMS ITS AN EXCUSE!
a sad pathetic one at that!
ALY XXX

reply to post by eletheia

Further down the page....Extensive Defination - second paragraph:-

In common usage, the term pedophile refers to an adult who is sexually attracted to

children, WHETHER OR NOT THE ADULT ACT UPON THAT ATTRACTION by sexually

abusing a child.

I think you're misunderstanding what is a crime and what isn't.

The crime is sexual assault, or rape - depending upon the details. The reason it is so with a minor is because the minor is not able to legally make decisions. The crime is not being attracted to young girls.

Take one of the wealthier guys who frequents our restaurant - he has a reputation for being interested in and looking at girls. To my knowledge, he's never actually done anything, and I couldn't care less what's on his computer.

Is he a criminal for being attracted to girls?

Or take my example with the neighbor girl. I wasn't attracted to her because she was a young girl - but that doesn't change the fact that she was a girl well under the age of consent. Although, my current relationship interest is in one of my friends/co-workers with some Philippine heritage, and she is -always- mistaken for a 12 year old girl (yet she's only a month my junior) ... so maybe I do have a problem......

In either case - there is a difference between someone who is out there touching girls, and someone who is attracted to them.

There is also little difference between someone who watches child pornography and someone who watches pornography involving arabs, asians, and some of the other ethnic groups. Many of those are based on a literal slave-trade. While child pornography is considered illegal - videos of young adults being forced into pornographic scenes by their pimps are hardly any better from an ethical standpoint.

Originally posted by eletheia
The instance of murder in the UK has gone up over the years since the death penalty was

dropped - so it would seem punishment DOES deter crime.

And that's related to the death penalty...how? Murders in the US have similarly increased, yet they still have the death penalty.

Yes, psychopaths are born with a brain disorder that prevents them from mirroring the emotions of others. In other words, when they see you in pain, they feel no pain themselves (normal people do internally mirror the emotions of others). So these people are born freaks, and do I feel bad for them? Yes, I do.

But, there is practical reality to consider. Certainly if my child were harmed there would be no limit to the destruction I would cause in revenge. How can I consider the child of another any less important or deserving of protection?

Until there is a way to correct the brains of psychopaths (or otherwise render them harmless), I think there should be a class of crimes considered so heinous that the only possible sentence is a lifetime of incarceration with no possibility of parole. The civil rights of all the child abusers combined are worth less than the life of a single child.

Originally posted by Flyinghaggis
reply to post by illuminatitanimulli

 

Physical castration is better. Execution is the best .

Yup, pair of sledgehammers to crack the nuts. If not effective, involuntary euthenasia.

The problem is that female pedophiles are often overlooked and cops refuse to prosecute them. Add in false accusations(remember the 80's witch hunts).

www.child-safety-for-parents.com...

If laws are passed the citizenry should be broken down into three groups. Those who support, those who are neutral and those who are opposed. Whenever an innocent person has done to them what you suggest be done to pedophiles, people from the "support" category are picked at random to make up for the abuse of an innocent person.

reply to post by Cricious


My apologies sir, you explained that very well thank you.