tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post5055169038303917096..comments2024-03-27T09:14:27.496+00:00Comments on All That Is Solid ...: The Paedophile Next DoorPhilhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06298147857234479278noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-76519225166302695922014-12-06T00:26:03.317+00:002014-12-06T00:26:03.317+00:00I think it is a good thing that this issues is bei...I think it is a good thing that this issues is being challenged in a different way. The whole "stranger danger" skew on the issue of child abuse massively misrepresents the majority of abuse committed against children.<br /><br />But many still refuse that to be true. They still refuse to accept that children are far more likely to be abused in their own home than by professional or a stranger.<br /><br />I was once told by a parent outside a school that there were 3 known paedophiles living in the area. She was aghast when I told her that was nothing compared to the number of unknown paedophiles picking their children up from school that day!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-17550115112230480682014-11-29T20:14:37.144+00:002014-11-29T20:14:37.144+00:00I don't know why people can't understand t...I don't know why people can't understand the term 'paedophile'. <br /><br />It is not illegal or wrong to be a paedophile in the same way it was not illegal or wrong to have been a male homosexual before 1967 in the UK.<br /><br />What was illegal before 1967 was for a man (or boy) to engage in sexual acts with another man.<br /><br />Even the most rancid reacationaries have not yet made it illegal just to be a paedophile - who can control their sexual preference? - it is sex acts with a child that are banned but everywhere you would think just being a paedophile breaks the law. <br /><br />I think the age of consent is too high (maybe should be 12, 14?) and the laws against what some paedophiles may do are oppressive e.g. I understand that you can get realistic fake childsex images that are completely photoshopped or whatever i.e. no human models involved, all 'composed' by someone - and possession of this is still treated as the same as possession of real child-sex photos. <br /><br />I wouldn't now think that my youthful view of 'no age of consent' is correct (most probably) but I still think that paedomania both is an attempt to control the lives of some young people e.g. in relationships with their teachers by adding it in with what is clearly wrong (and can be horrific), but often covered by other laws e.g. rape.Southpawpunchhttps://twitter.com/Southpawpunchnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-32017262319976710712014-11-27T13:16:28.141+00:002014-11-27T13:16:28.141+00:00Are you part of the problem Phil?
Jimmy a 'cri...Are you part of the problem Phil?<br />Jimmy a 'criminal' a man accused in life and accused more in death and including shagging dead bodies!<br />So much for innocent until proven guilty.<br /><br />The thought that queues of non criminal paedophiles about to enter clinics is quite a fantastical thought and one I fear doomed from the outset, but who knows?<br />'Dear Mum, I'm a paedo but I haven't touched anyone (honest)'<br />Wow!<br />My belief that is the only letter ever written and ever will be written.<br />I accept that there are some paedophiles out there who never turn to criminal acts but we see daily of pederasts guilty of past or recent crimes.<br />Criminals of a serious nature, sex attacks upon unwilling children (pre 16)are worthy of jail and if the rehabilitation within that setting involves therapy, then so be it.<br />All criminal acts are subject to possible jail and sex attacks on children are subject to jail also.<br />The view of challenging a would-be pederasts behaviour is laudable but would involve altering a human behaviour going back thousands of years where it was the norm.<br />I'm sceptical.<br />The act of doing something rather than nothing is intended to make us feel better about ourselves and perhaps nothing more.Gary Elsbynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-69036012806737643002014-11-26T17:52:35.585+00:002014-11-26T17:52:35.585+00:00What happened to his human rights? No one in that ...What happened to his human rights? No one in that program gave a damn about the human rights of Ed. We have a copper who's proud to call himself a "paedophile hunter", which to Ed is saying: "you are my prey", but there is no admission of this unjust hunt against him? "I would probably want to kill you", but that's OK, he can say that to a paedophile! You know what puts a real dark light on this? Some paedophiles are also victims to something that happens to them as they enter this world, until they die. "We saw images of children as young as babies being raped" the "child protection expert" said . Really?!! You can go see exactly that on youtube if you look up "infant circumcision", or what it's becoming more widely known as: "genital mutilation" - which is hunky-f**king-dory in this warped hypocritical two-faced sexually ill and morally bankrupt society. Ed should have told them to stuff their "therapy". Society needs help more than Ed: supporting the knife-rape of boys. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1OJZMOGw1IDavenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-77899720464524538982014-11-26T16:12:30.185+00:002014-11-26T16:12:30.185+00:00We cannot divorce this from the culture, the sexua...We cannot divorce this from the culture, the sexualisation of children from a young age, the belief that all underage sex is abuse. If children are empowered, as asquith demands then would we will listen to them when they say they enjoyed the sex actually? No, we will actually imprison the kids for their own benefit.<br /><br />We should also be aware of a culture of compensation, that is also bound to skew the figures.<br /><br />And we should be careful to not make hearsay a fact. I was watching a report on the TV about Rotherham, where someone said that girls who were going into the town centre were being told by men they would be raped as a consequence. Clearly over-hyped bullshit, but the sort that the Tabloids build their entire argument on.<br /><br />Sex is a taboo, kids can be homeless, drug addicts, begging, riddled with disease and no one really care, just don't you dare have sex! (Rotherham proved this beyond any doubt).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-82745786961864019312014-11-26T15:16:38.799+00:002014-11-26T15:16:38.799+00:00What I say is that we need more "subversion&q...What I say is that we need more "subversion", and (pace Dan Ware) more "answering back". We need to abolish once and for all the culture in which children are seen and not heard and voices of authority are always deferred to.<br /><br />In Ireland in the 50s, the clergy could do no wrong. (I suspect some imams might be in a similar place now, and that's before we even get to the fact that child "marriage" is actually viewed as normal normal in too many places and must be abolished worrldwide).<br /><br />Didn't we know who Jimmy Saville, Cyril Smith and Rolf Harris WERE, and what they would DO to us if we said a word against them? Children, having been battered by their teachers, were then battered at home on the grounds that if they'd been punished they must be guilty.<br /><br />In Rotherham, what else did you expect from some little slag who has so little self-respect she goes with a paki? (I use these words because you just KNOW that's what senior management at the council said to each other, which is why they didn't bother to investigate properly and is also why the idea that there was some PC conspiracy is even more absurd than it normally is).<br /><br />Some people don't deserve to be "pillars of society" and their authority thoroughly needs to be "undermined" by transparency.<br /><br />An accusation must be investigated, the accused might be innocent or guilty but that's for a fair and properly funded and supported legal system to ssettle.<br /><br />That is my stance on the matter and you have it.asquithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14246701347539264295noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-91751423264901519542014-11-26T11:43:33.090+00:002014-11-26T11:43:33.090+00:00Feeling a bit moral this morning!Feeling a bit moral this morning!Philhttp://gapingsilence.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-37347989907330490322014-11-26T11:43:11.309+00:002014-11-26T11:43:11.309+00:00If that argument's right, the callousness and ...If that argument's right, the callousness and cruelty of the 90s anti-paedo campaign (take a bow, Rebekah "Innocent" Brooks) led to <b>more</b> callousness and cruelty inflicted by paedophiles, not less.<br /><br />And that shouldn't really surprise us - cruelty breeds cruelty, whatever the cause. Persecuting people isn't short-sighted or mistaken or counter-productive or excessive, it's just evil. As Sydney Carter said, <a href="http://www.raymondfolk.com/page/The+Devil+Wore+a+Crucifix" rel="nofollow">The devil wore a crucifix</a>Philhttp://gapingsilence.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.com