QuotePope's No. 2 Links Pedophilia, Homosexuality
By Advocate.com Editors
The Vatican's secretary of state has linked the sex scandals currently rocking the Roman Catholic Church to homosexuality, not celibacy among priests.
Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, second in command to the pope, made the comments Monday at a press conference in Chile, where a priest is being investigated for having sex with young girls.
"Many psychologists and psychiatrists have demonstrated that there is no relation between celibacy and pedophilia. But many others have demonstrated, I have been told recently, that there is a relation between homosexuality and pedophilia," Bertone said. "That is true. That is the problem."
Gay rights activists in Chile were quick to dismiss Bertone's claims.
"This is a perverse strategy by the Vatican to shirk its own ethical and legal responsibility by making a spurious and disgusting connection," said Rolando Jimenez, president of the Movement for Homosexual Integration and Liberation in Chile.
http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2010/04/12/Popes_Number_Two_Links_Pedophilia_Homosexuality/
Fucking scumbag piece-of-shits. Not only covering their own kiddie fiddling, but even when they are down, trying to stoke anti-gay hate.
Since most gays become gays due to child abuse, molestation and rape, I cannot comprehend why would you rule out pedophilia in making little Martinus eager for more cock... :rolleyes:
You hate them because they are right? Do you also hate scientists? Homosexuality is not that different then any other paraphilic disorder. The sooner you come to terms with your condition and stop projecting hatred and bigotry on others the happier you'll be.
:huh: You have yet to find a single celibate man fucking children.
Quote from: Alexandru H. on April 13, 2010, 03:25:21 AM
Since most gays become gays due to child abuse, molestation and rape, I cannot comprehend why would you rule out pedophilia in making little Martinus eager for more cock... :rolleyes:
I'm special then as I didn't become gay for any of those reasons. :)
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcarlnet.no-ip.org%2Feveryone-fag-line.gif&hash=c8a1637087cfacc59edbffdc44a8c5f257d6bbb8)
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 13, 2010, 05:08:24 AM
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcarlnet.no-ip.org%2Feveryone-fag-line.gif&hash=c8a1637087cfacc59edbffdc44a8c5f257d6bbb8)
:lol: Touche'
Quote from: Razgovory on April 13, 2010, 05:50:59 AM
:lol: Touche'
Oh yeah?
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcarlnet.no-ip.org%2Feveryone-fag-line.gif&hash=c8a1637087cfacc59edbffdc44a8c5f257d6bbb8)
Checkmate.
Quote from: garbon on April 13, 2010, 04:44:06 AM
Quote from: Alexandru H. on April 13, 2010, 03:25:21 AM
Since most gays become gays due to child abuse, molestation and rape, I cannot comprehend why would you rule out pedophilia in making little Martinus eager for more cock... :rolleyes:
I'm special then as I didn't become gay for any of those reasons. :)
Me too. :(
Why are you outraged? Is this surprising at all? They don't like gays & they're going to take every opportunity to bash you cocklovers. Stop worrying about what the Church think.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 13, 2010, 05:55:48 AM
Oh yeah?
But you posted above that line as well. The only way to fix it is to delete your original post. But then the Brain can simply do it again. The only way to win is not to play.
Everyone who posts below this is a fag. Unless I post again, in which case this post is null and void. :homestar:
:nelson: @ everyone in this thread. Honorable mention to Money for making me laugh - twice.
G.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi43.tinypic.com%2F2s1syzr.jpg&hash=8da7248762c709051fa9bf16e1fe78d22dc8e7de)
Quote from: Martinus on April 13, 2010, 03:21:20 AM
QuotePope's No. 2 Links Pedophilia, Homosexuality
By Advocate.com Editors
The Vatican's secretary of state has linked the sex scandals currently rocking the Roman Catholic Church to homosexuality, not celibacy among priests.
Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, second in command to the pope, made the comments Monday at a press conference in Chile, where a priest is being investigated for having sex with young girls.
"Many psychologists and psychiatrists have demonstrated that there is no relation between celibacy and pedophilia. But many others have demonstrated, I have been told recently, that there is a relation between homosexuality and pedophilia," Bertone said. "That is true. That is the problem."
Gay rights activists in Chile were quick to dismiss Bertone's claims.
"This is a perverse strategy by the Vatican to shirk its own ethical and legal responsibility by making a spurious and disgusting connection," said Rolando Jimenez, president of the Movement for Homosexual Integration and Liberation in Chile.
http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2010/04/12/Popes_Number_Two_Links_Pedophilia_Homosexuality/
Fucking scumbag piece-of-shits. Not only covering their own kiddie fiddling, but even when they are down, trying to stoke anti-gay hate.
I concur.
Not with you, but the argument--speaking as a Catholic scumbag.
A Mart thread on the gay or the religion?
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fapi.ning.com%2Ffiles%2FkX%2ALFPvx4SFMMQMYsrSDIAYo8LYm-kfSSQfMh2w2kYQPOgupyqH2z19KNwPclicam8JamHJLNl4ixdp%2AZIaKr5Dz%2Ac7OD-k-%2Fwharrgarbl.jpg&hash=47f0b1e572ed5d1efcf88a2a05600d86bc08601b)
He's mad because it's true. :(
Quote from: Martinus on April 13, 2010, 03:21:20 AM
Fucking scumbag piece-of-shits. Not only covering their own kiddie fiddling, but even when they are down, trying to stoke anti-gay hate.
I resisted the urge to post this yesterday night :D
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.iwatchstuff.com%2F2009%2F04%2F22%2Fkick-ass-hit-girl.jpg&hash=65bfa397e50bfb09c8eaca0eade34d644ed3a539)
The Pope sent her.
If you hate fucking Catholic scumbags, maybe you should just stop doing it. :P
Do you have a better link to what was said rather than yet another thread started by a reference to an internet site with an axe to grind?
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 13, 2010, 10:59:05 AM
Do you have a better link to what was said rather than yet another thread started by a reference to an internet site with an axe to grind?
well, I saw the same thing in French too, so it's probably true. IIRC, it's not the first time this priests says stuff like that.
Not that it really matters.
Enough with baiting Martinus with faux homophobia, that's not going to work anymore, let's try to have a serious discussion here.
Martinus, is your problem with the statement the fact that the Church is trying to change the subject? Or do you seriously believe that homosexuality and paedophilia are not linked?
Marty's problem is that he is the Tim of gays.
Quote from: DGuller on April 13, 2010, 12:40:16 PM
Enough with baiting Martinus with faux homophobia, that's not going to work anymore, let's try to have a serious discussion here.
Martinus, is your problem with the statement the fact that the Church is trying to change the subject? Or do you seriously believe that homosexuality and paedophilia are not linked?
Both.
The alleged link between homosexuality and pedophilia is based in a series of fallacies and misconceptions about human sexuality, that are often exploited by homophobes out of ignorance or malice. The facts (which are statistically misinterpreted) are these:
1. Most psychologists and sexologists agree that pedophiles are not attracted exclusively to children of a single gender, but rather are attracted to both genders (I am using the word "pedophile" in a medical, not legal sense - this is obviously less true for ephebophiles, i.e. people attracted to post-pubescent teenagers - such people have "adult" sexual orientation).
2. Most pedophiles are men.
3. It is easier for pedophiles to gain access to children of the same sex as they are, because the society is segregating sexes of children in many occasions as a means of protecting them (for example, boyscouts, altar boys etc.). This means that statistically more pedophiliac sex assaults are committed by men on boys. On the other hand, single pedophile men are much less likely to be put in a position when they would have an easy unsupervised access to girls. Essentially, this means acts of "homosexual" pedophilia are a result of an opportunity rather than sexual attraction to male children (i.e. homosexuality). The situation is in a way similar to homosexual acts occurring in prisons and other male-only facilities.
4. This is pure speculation, but I would not be surprised if many pedophiles actually experiment with homosexuality at some point, when they realize they are not interested in adult people of the opposite sex, as a sort of coping mechanism/desperate attempt to find a legal way of sexual expression for themselves. Once they become unsatisfied with it, they turn to pedophilia eventually, but this may mean that they would be regarded as "gay" despite not being of homosexual orientation.
Not to mention, even if for the sake of argument, one would call these men "homosexual", and whereas such men make more than half of pedophiles, the total percentage of such men among the populace of gay men is still miniscule and does not warrant considering gay men unfit to work with children etc. Again, this is something you should understand as an actuary - only because A is relatively more likely than B to have a trait X, it does not necessarily mean that A is objectively likely to have that trait.
Quote from: Martinus on April 13, 2010, 01:05:55 PM
sexologists
:lol: That's one of my favorite -ologists, right up there with ufologist. Double points if the sexologist is with the such & such "Center for Sex Positive Studies".
Marty of course ignores the fact that homosexuality and pedophilia are both paraphilic abnormal sexual practices. The only difference is one is more socially acceptable to others. Pedophiles have campaigned for acceptance and the removal of pedophilia from criminal and mental health definitions but have failed. Homosexuals have succeeded.
Marty, I have no opinion on the alleged homosexual-pedophile linkage, but several aspects of your post needs correction, or at least clarification.
Quote from: Martinus on April 13, 2010, 01:05:55 PM
Both.
The alleged link between homosexuality and pedophilia is based in a series of fallacies and misconceptions about human sexuality, that are often exploited by homophobes out of ignorance or malice. The facts (which are statistically misinterpreted) are these:
1. Most psychologists and sexologists agree that pedophiles are not attracted exclusively to children of a single gender, but rather are attracted to both genders (I am using the word "pedophile" in a medical, not legal sense - this is obviously less true for ephebophiles, i.e. people attracted to post-pubescent teenagers - such people have "adult" sexual orientation).
I do not believe this is true. Pedophiles can be same sex, opposite-sex, or for lack of a better word, 'equal opportunity'. I am fairly confident there is no consensus on what "most" pedophiles are attracted to.
Quote from: Martinus
2. Most pedophiles are men.
Most pedophile sex offenders are male. I don't believe we have anything approaching reliable statistics on non-offending pedophiles.
As for your other two points (my IE is suddenly acting wonky), you identify your fourth point as speculation which is fine, but I believe your third point is speculative as well. You are correct to state that 'access' is probably more important that sexual offending then is pure sexual attraction, but I doubt very much there are any statistics on what kind of offender is able to have tontact with what kind of potential victim.
Anyways, I think you are making statements that are far too definitive given what we know (and do not know) about sexual offenders.
The Church's glass house is already just a mess of sharp glass shards and debris strewn around the remains of the foundation and supports. They see no downside in continuing to throw stones. Notwithstanding the bit about "he who is without sin" casting them.
Quote from: Razgovory on April 13, 2010, 01:25:53 PM
The only difference is one is more socially acceptable to others.
No, the main difference is that one is between consent adults, and the other involves abusing/hurting a child unable to give consent. I know you are trolling, but I meet with too much of such bullshit being spouted in Poland to let it pass.
Quote from: Martinus on April 13, 2010, 01:05:55 PM
Quote from: DGuller on April 13, 2010, 12:40:16 PM
Enough with baiting Martinus with faux homophobia, that's not going to work anymore, let's try to have a serious discussion here.
Martinus, is your problem with the statement the fact that the Church is trying to change the subject? Or do you seriously believe that homosexuality and paedophilia are not linked?
Both.
The alleged link between homosexuality and pedophilia is based in a series of fallacies and misconceptions about human sexuality, that are often exploited by homophobes out of ignorance or malice. The facts (which are statistically misinterpreted) are these:
1. Most psychologists and sexologists agree that pedophiles are not attracted exclusively to children of a single gender, but rather are attracted to both genders (I am using the word "pedophile" in a medical, not legal sense - this is obviously less true for ephebophiles, i.e. people attracted to post-pubescent teenagers - such people have "adult" sexual orientation).
2. Most pedophiles are men.
3. It is easier for pedophiles to gain access to children of the same sex as they are, because the society is segregating sexes of children in many occasions as a means of protecting them (for example, boyscouts, altar boys etc.). This means that statistically more pedophiliac sex assaults are committed by men on boys. On the other hand, single pedophile men are much less likely to be put in a position when they would have an easy unsupervised access to girls. Essentially, this means acts of "homosexual" pedophilia are a result of an opportunity rather than sexual attraction to male children (i.e. homosexuality). The situation is in a way similar to homosexual acts occurring in prisons and other male-only facilities.
4. This is pure speculation, but I would not be surprised if many pedophiles actually experiment with homosexuality at some point, when they realize they are not interested in adult people of the opposite sex, as a sort of coping mechanism/desperate attempt to find a legal way of sexual expression for themselves. Once they become unsatisfied with it, they turn to pedophilia eventually, but this may mean that they would be regarded as "gay" despite not being of homosexual orientation.
Not to mention, even if for the sake of argument, one would call these men "homosexual", and whereas such men make more than half of pedophiles, the total percentage of such men among the populace of gay men is still miniscule and does not warrant considering gay men unfit to work with children etc. Again, this is something you should understand as an actuary - only because A is relatively more likely than B to have a trait X, it does not necessarily mean that A is objectively likely to have that trait.
TL:DR Marty's a fag.
I don't think either homosexuality or celibacy is really a cause of the problems the Catholic Church is experiencing. The problem is that those who have an inclination to prey on children are going to be drawn to professions where: 1) they work with children, and 2) where they are seen as authority figures. Compared to other positions where both of those are true, I think that the nature of the Catholic priesthood does make it easier and more attractive to pedophiles, since it probably makes it harder to get caught.
Quote from: dps on April 13, 2010, 02:46:10 PM
I don't think either homosexuality or celibacy is really a cause of the problems the Catholic Church is experiencing. The problem is that those who have an inclination to prey on children are going to be drawn to professions where: 1) they work with children, and 2) where they are seen as authority figures. Compared to other positions where both of those are true, I think that the nature of the Catholic priesthood does make it easier and more attractive to pedophiles, since it probably makes it harder to get caught.
I have heard this theory before (although more generally, and not specifically when talking about the Catholic Church), and I'm still not sure I buy it...
Quote from: Martinus on April 13, 2010, 02:06:57 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on April 13, 2010, 01:25:53 PM
The only difference is one is more socially acceptable to others.
No, the main difference is that one is between consent adults, and the other involves abusing/hurting a child unable to give consent. I know you are trolling, but I meet with too much of such bullshit being spouted in Poland to let it pass.
Yes, because it's between consenting adults it's considered socially acceptable. If we considered children able to give consent then it is likely that pedophilia would be socially acceptable. It is but a social construct, a quirk of fate that one is socially acceptable and the other not. Due to the similarities between them and likely a shared root cause you find the odd situation where the same person will claim that pedophilia is something to be cured while militantly claiming homosexuality can not be cured.
Quote from: Barrister on April 13, 2010, 02:52:53 PM
Quote from: dps on April 13, 2010, 02:46:10 PM
I don't think either homosexuality or celibacy is really a cause of the problems the Catholic Church is experiencing. The problem is that those who have an inclination to prey on children are going to be drawn to professions where: 1) they work with children, and 2) where they are seen as authority figures. Compared to other positions where both of those are true, I think that the nature of the Catholic priesthood does make it easier and more attractive to pedophiles, since it probably makes it harder to get caught.
I have heard this theory before (although more generally, and not specifically when talking about the Catholic Church), and I'm still not sure I buy it...
I have no idea if in fact Catholic priests are more statistically likely to be pedophiles than the general population, or indeed than other religious authority figures. It may be the case, I simply don't know.
Nonetheless, the
frequency of Catholic priests being abusers isn't the cause of the Church's current problems.
The cause of the Church's problems is the reactions of the Church, as an institution, to priestly abusers, not the fact that many priests are abusers.
Though that being said, it seems to make intuitive sense that a position of trust in which the position-holder is
supposed to not have ordinary sexual relations is tailor-made for abusers. While some pedophiles can have normal sexual relations (and their partner not notice their "extracuricular" activities), many cannot; having a partner complicates the task of abuse (your wife/husband/whatever is likely to notice you are abusing kids), and in many traditional societies, lacking a partner would draw notice.
Man, I truly suck at trolling. About 95%, I elicit no reaction at all. The other 5% of the time, my troll starts a serious discussion. :(
Quote from: DGuller on April 13, 2010, 03:31:22 PM
Man, I truly suck at trolling. About 95%, I elicit no reaction at all. The other 5% of the time, my troll starts a serious discussion. :(
Troll? :hmm:
Quote from: DGuller on April 13, 2010, 03:31:22 PM
Man, I truly suck at trolling. About 95%, I elicit no reaction at all. The other 5% of the time, my troll starts a serious discussion. :(
You should watch what Grumbler does and do that. His trolls work because he honestly doesn't think he's doing it. It's so natural it's subconscious. Admittedly he has more practice. The first forum he trolled was a Roman Forum. His comebacks are weaker though. It's usually some variation of "I know you are, but what am I".
Quote from: Razgovory on April 13, 2010, 03:40:52 PM
Admittedly he has more practice. The first forum he trolled was a Roman Forum.
:lol:
Quote from: DGuller on April 13, 2010, 03:50:28 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on April 13, 2010, 03:40:52 PM
Admittedly he has more practice. The first forum he trolled was a Roman Forum.
:lol:
Scipio took it up the ass!
Quote from: Razgovory on April 13, 2010, 03:40:52 PM
You should watch what Grumbler does and do that. His trolls work because he honestly doesn't think he's doing it.
I don't believe that for a second.
Quote from: DGuller on April 13, 2010, 12:40:16 PM
Enough with baiting Martinus with faux homophobia, that's not going to work anymore...
If you had just waited a bit longer he would have come through.
Quote from: Barrister on April 13, 2010, 03:55:15 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on April 13, 2010, 03:40:52 PM
You should watch what Grumbler does and do that. His trolls work because he honestly doesn't think he's doing it.
I don't believe that for a second.
Don't believe what?
Quote from: Razgovory on April 13, 2010, 04:08:23 PM
Quote from: Barrister on April 13, 2010, 03:55:15 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on April 13, 2010, 03:40:52 PM
You should watch what Grumbler does and do that. His trolls work because he honestly doesn't think he's doing it.
I don't believe that for a second.
Don't believe what?
That grumbler doesn't think he's trolling.
Now he's going to quote your quoting error.
Quote from: Viking on April 13, 2010, 10:03:55 AM
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.iwatchstuff.com%2F2009%2F04%2F22%2Fkick-ass-hit-girl.jpg&hash=65bfa397e50bfb09c8eaca0eade34d644ed3a539)
The Pope sent her.
That's beautiful.
Is that a Glock 26 or 23?
Quote from: Razgovory on April 13, 2010, 04:14:37 PM
Now he's going to quote your quoting error.
Meh - I make quoting errors (and spelling errors, and grammar errors), all the time.
Quote from: Razgovory on April 13, 2010, 03:40:52 PM
The first forum he trolled was a Roman Forum.
LOL I didn't get it on the first read-through. Good one. :D
Quote from: Razgovory on April 13, 2010, 04:14:37 PM
Now he's going to quote your quoting error.
I was half way through typing some advice for you about appreciating Grumbler's wit. But if you stopped being his perfect straight man I would get less enjoyment reading his posts.
Are you sure that was suppose to be directed at me?
Can we go back to all the on-forum lawyers debating whether paedophila and homosexuality are linked or not? That was getting interesting. So far, as a neutral jury, being neither gay or a kiddie lover, I'm liking what BB had to say on the matter.
Quote from: Barrister on April 13, 2010, 02:52:53 PM
Quote from: dps on April 13, 2010, 02:46:10 PM
I don't think either homosexuality or celibacy is really a cause of the problems the Catholic Church is experiencing. The problem is that those who have an inclination to prey on children are going to be drawn to professions where: 1) they work with children, and 2) where they are seen as authority figures. Compared to other positions where both of those are true, I think that the nature of the Catholic priesthood does make it easier and more attractive to pedophiles, since it probably makes it harder to get caught.
I have heard this theory before (although more generally, and not specifically when talking about the Catholic Church), and I'm still not sure I buy it...
You don't buy the idea that pedophiles are going to be attracted to professions in which they have a legit excuse for being around children? I admit, I haven't read any particular studies on the subject, but it seems like common sense.
Quote from: Josephus on April 13, 2010, 06:32:01 PM
Can we go back to all the on-forum lawyers debating whether paedophila and homosexuality are linked or not? That was getting interesting. So far, as a neutral jury, being neither gay or a kiddie lover, I'm liking what BB had to say on the matter.
Unfortunately all I had to say was "these things are complicated, and our understanding of abnormal sexual behaviours is far from perfect". :(
Plus most of what I know is from either a really interesting, but only 2 hour long, talk by a psychiatrist who studied in particular adolescent sexual offenders, plus a large number, but purely anecdotal, experience in dealing with allegations of sexual offences.
It is quite possible that there is a statistical correlation between homosexuality and pedophilia. I don't think any such link has been proven however. Come on - we still can't decide how many people are "gay" to begin with!
Quote from: dps on April 13, 2010, 06:41:06 PM
Quote from: Barrister on April 13, 2010, 02:52:53 PM
Quote from: dps on April 13, 2010, 02:46:10 PM
I don't think either homosexuality or celibacy is really a cause of the problems the Catholic Church is experiencing. The problem is that those who have an inclination to prey on children are going to be drawn to professions where: 1) they work with children, and 2) where they are seen as authority figures. Compared to other positions where both of those are true, I think that the nature of the Catholic priesthood does make it easier and more attractive to pedophiles, since it probably makes it harder to get caught.
I have heard this theory before (although more generally, and not specifically when talking about the Catholic Church), and I'm still not sure I buy it...
You don't buy the idea that pedophiles are going to be attracted to professions in which they have a legit excuse for being around children? I admit, I haven't read any particular studies on the subject, but it seems like common sense.
It seems to call for an awful lot of planning...
I doubt very much there are any studies on the topic. How would you study such a phenomenon?
Here's a question: Assuming homosexuality has nothing to do with pedophilia, why do you think it is that ancient Greek homosexual sex tended to be between men and boys? My guess is that in a society which has an expectation of homosexual activity, men who are otherwise inclined toward the straight end of the spectrum (the majority) would be more likely drawn to a young boy to fulfill the expectation than to a grown and manly adult. If so, that tendency might become somewhat codified into the expectation itself and lead to the identification later on of homosexual activity with pedophilia.
Quote from: Barrister on April 13, 2010, 06:49:40 PM
I doubt very much there are any studies on the topic. How would you study such a phenomenon?
You hook up Beeb's patented Boner Meter to a bunch of priests and show them pics of naked altar boys. :)
Quote from: Admiral Yi on April 13, 2010, 06:52:00 PM
Quote from: Barrister on April 13, 2010, 06:49:40 PM
I doubt very much there are any studies on the topic. How would you study such a phenomenon?
You hook up Beeb's patented Boner Meter to a bunch of priests and show them pics of naked altar boys. :)
I hardly have a patent on the Penile Plethismograph (PPG). :(
It can give you some idea of sexual attraction, but how do you then study why people entered certain jobs? In particular when people have every reason in the world to lie?
If there is one job that would attract pedophiles/gays even more than priesthood, it would have to be the job of administrating the PPG tests.
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on April 13, 2010, 06:51:34 PM
Here's a question: Assuming homosexuality has nothing to do with pedophilia, why do you think it is that ancient Greek homosexual sex tended to be between men and boys? My guess is that in a society which has an expectation of homosexual activity, men who are otherwise inclined toward the straight end of the spectrum (the majority) would be more likely drawn to a young boy to fulfill the expectation than to a grown and manly adult. If so, that tendency might become somewhat codified into the expectation itself and lead to the identification later on of homosexual activity with pedophilia.
But sexuality does have a strong cultural element. Greek society may have had a lot of sex acts between men and boys because it was expected. :mellow:
Fun fact: I once heard a presentation by Roy Hazelwood, who did a lot of work with the FBI in working with and classifying sexual sadists and serieal killers (the kind of stuff they do on Criminal Minds). He mentioned that when he got started back in the 60s or 70s it was extremely rare to see an instance of anal rape - it just wasn't something people really considered, thought about, or fantasized about. But with the increasing prevalence of porn, and hard-core porn, the incidence of violent sexual anal rapes increased dramatically.
Quote from: DGuller on April 13, 2010, 07:04:09 PM
If there is one job that would attract pedophiles/gays even more than priesthood, it would have to be the job of administrating the PPG tests.
Nah. Administering such tests on youths (at least in Canada) has been quite definitely found to be unethical.
Quote from: Barrister on April 13, 2010, 06:55:34 PM
I hardly have a patent on the Penile Plethismograph (PPG). :(
Which is a shame, because there appear to be quite a few:
http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=7k8uAAAAEBAJ&dq=penile+plethysmograph
http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=adscAAAAEBAJ&dq=penile+plethysmograph
http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=CJwFAAAAEBAJ&dq=penile+plethysmograph
Just to pick 3.
Quote from: Barrister on April 13, 2010, 06:49:40 PM
I doubt very much there are any studies on the topic. How would you study such a phenomenon?
iirc there have been such studies. In the early days of the Human Rights code the justification for criminal background checks for people working with children was, at least in part, justified on this basis - ie pedophiles are attracted to positions where they can have unsupervised contact with children - for example boy scout leaders, teachers and priests who have sexually molested children.
I dont know of any studies linking homosexuality to a propensity for pedophilia. I doubt it exists. I think it more likely that pedophiles are equal opportunity abusers. Take Clifford Olsen for example.
Quote from: ulmont on April 13, 2010, 07:08:14 PM
Quote from: Barrister on April 13, 2010, 06:55:34 PM
I hardly have a patent on the Penile Plethismograph (PPG). :(
Which is a shame, because there appear to be quite a few:
http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=7k8uAAAAEBAJ&dq=penile+plethysmograph
http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=adscAAAAEBAJ&dq=penile+plethysmograph
http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=CJwFAAAAEBAJ&dq=penile+plethysmograph
Just to pick 3.
Don't flatter yourself, one is enough.
I found this research piece looking for the studies I told BB about.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/20809797/M-Seto-Pedophilia-and-Sexual-Offending-Against-Children-Theory-Assessment-and-Intervention-2008
I scanned it and the sense I get is that there is no link between homosexuality and pedophilia but the piece suggests a number of other causes.
Quote from: DGuller on April 13, 2010, 07:04:09 PM
If there is one job that would attract pedophiles/gays even more than priesthood, it would have to be the job of administrating the PPG tests.
There is such a thing? For real? Isn't a boner, a boner? Can boners be quantified? Measured? Studied? Contemplated? Analysed....Anal...heh, I said anal..
Quote from: Josephus on April 13, 2010, 09:09:22 PM
Quote from: DGuller on April 13, 2010, 07:04:09 PM
If there is one job that would attract pedophiles/gays even more than priesthood, it would have to be the job of administrating the PPG tests.
There is such a thing? For real? Isn't a boner, a boner? Can boners be quantified? Measured? Studied? Contemplated? Analysed....Anal...heh, I said anal..
Yep, it has been a standard test for detecting sexual deviancy for some time. Basically you flash pictures and see what response you get.
Quote from: Malthus on April 13, 2010, 10:20:30 AM
If you hate fucking Catholic scumbags, maybe you should just stop doing it. :P
:D
Pedophilia = homosexualia
I mean, are you seriously going to argue that being atracted to MALE boys is not gay?
Quote from: Siege on April 14, 2010, 02:12:49 AM
Pedophilia = homosexualia
I mean, are you seriously going to argue that being atracted to MALE boys is not gay?
What about people attracted to FEMALE boys?
Quote from: Martinus on April 14, 2010, 02:16:08 AM
Quote from: Siege on April 14, 2010, 02:12:49 AM
Pedophilia = homosexualia
I mean, are you seriously going to argue that being atracted to MALE boys is not gay?
What about people attracted to FEMALE boys?
:huh: You're a moron.
Quote from: Alexandru H. on April 14, 2010, 02:27:00 AM
Quote from: Martinus on April 14, 2010, 02:16:08 AM
Quote from: Siege on April 14, 2010, 02:12:49 AM
Pedophilia = homosexualia
I mean, are you seriously going to argue that being atracted to MALE boys is not gay?
What about people attracted to FEMALE boys?
:huh: You're a moron.
In this particular instance, I don't think Marty is the moron...
Quote from: BVN on April 14, 2010, 02:55:59 AM
Quote from: Alexandru H. on April 14, 2010, 02:27:00 AM
Quote from: Martinus on April 14, 2010, 02:16:08 AM
Quote from: Siege on April 14, 2010, 02:12:49 AM
Pedophilia = homosexualia
I mean, are you seriously going to argue that being atracted to MALE boys is not gay?
What about people attracted to FEMALE boys?
:huh: You're a moron.
In this particular instance, I don't think Marty is the moron...
What Siegy said was not a stupidity, but a truism. While it sounds weird, it's not wrongfully used. Marty responded quite differently, placing an illogical expression as the means of counteracting Siegy's argument. If he would have used "female girls" instead, it would have been better.
Quote from: Siege on April 14, 2010, 02:12:49 AM
Pedophilia = homosexualia
I mean, are you seriously going to argue that being atracted to MALE boys is not gay?
Look who's talking, the guy who whacks off to Zach and Cody.
Quote from: Alexandru H. on April 14, 2010, 03:12:07 AM
What Siegy said was not a stupidity, but a truism. While it sounds weird, it's not wrongfully used. Marty responded quite differently, placing an illogical expression as the means of counteracting Siegy's argument. If he would have used "female girls" instead, it would have been better.
:huh: You're a moron.
Quote from: Alexandru H. on April 14, 2010, 03:12:07 AM
What Siegy said was not a stupidity, but a truism.
I was not implying that Siege is the moron...
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 13, 2010, 09:12:11 PM
Quote from: Josephus on April 13, 2010, 09:09:22 PM
Quote from: DGuller on April 13, 2010, 07:04:09 PM
If there is one job that would attract pedophiles/gays even more than priesthood, it would have to be the job of administrating the PPG tests.
There is such a thing? For real? Isn't a boner, a boner? Can boners be quantified? Measured? Studied? Contemplated? Analysed....Anal...heh, I said anal..
Yep, it has been a standard test for detecting sexual deviancy for some time. Basically you flash pictures and see what response you get.
I don't think it's a fair test. Some people are naturally more inclined to boners easier than others. For instance, a couple years ago I----wait...I'm not going to tell
languish that story.
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 13, 2010, 09:12:11 PM
Yep, it has been a standard test for detecting sexual deviancy for some time. Basically you flash pictures and see what response you get.
Do you happen to know where that is test actually used? And what is done with the results? Seems a bit like thought-crime policing.
Quote from: Pitiful Pathos on April 14, 2010, 07:42:31 AM
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 13, 2010, 09:12:11 PM
Yep, it has been a standard test for detecting sexual deviancy for some time. Basically you flash pictures and see what response you get.
Do you happen to know where that ople's minds, would be all in favor of throwing people in jail (gaol) just for thinking about committing a crime.is test actually used? And what is done with the results? Seems a bit like thought-crime policing.
You know, I like Beeb, and I agree with him on a lot of issues, but he does sometimes come across as the kind of guy who, if it were possible to actually read people's minds, would be all in favor of throwing them in jail just for thinking about committing crimes.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fs-ak.buzzfed.com%2Fstatic%2Fenhanced%2Fweb04%2F2010%2F4%2F12%2F8%2Fenhanced-buzz-21347-1271074488-363.jpg&hash=a2a3dcf4a8a2af4fa493366ff7e992238283f15a)
here my little pretties come to papa...
Quote from: Mr.Penguin on April 14, 2010, 09:11:23 AM
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fs-ak.buzzfed.com%2Fstatic%2Fenhanced%2Fweb04%2F2010%2F4%2F12%2F8%2Fenhanced-buzz-21347-1271074488-363.jpg&hash=a2a3dcf4a8a2af4fa493366ff7e992238283f15a)
here my little pretties come to papa...
Oh man, he *does* look actively evil. :lol:
Quote from: Pitiful Pathos on April 14, 2010, 07:42:31 AM
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 13, 2010, 09:12:11 PM
Yep, it has been a standard test for detecting sexual deviancy for some time. Basically you flash pictures and see what response you get.
Do you happen to know where that is test actually used? And what is done with the results? Seems a bit like thought-crime policing.
My knowledge is a bit dated on this - I studied as part of my criminology undergraduate work - so actually very outdated. But the tests were done on people already convicted of sex crimes involving children and these tests were used to assess risks on release, viable treatment programs etc.
Quote from: Josephus on April 14, 2010, 07:11:41 AM
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 13, 2010, 09:12:11 PM
Quote from: Josephus on April 13, 2010, 09:09:22 PM
Quote from: DGuller on April 13, 2010, 07:04:09 PM
If there is one job that would attract pedophiles/gays even more than priesthood, it would have to be the job of administrating the PPG tests.
There is such a thing? For real? Isn't a boner, a boner? Can boners be quantified? Measured? Studied? Contemplated? Analysed....Anal...heh, I said anal..
Yep, it has been a standard test for detecting sexual deviancy for some time. Basically you flash pictures and see what response you get.
I don't think it's a fair test. Some people are naturally more inclined to boners easier than others. For instance, a couple years ago I----wait...I'm not going to tell languish that story.
There is a base line taken first. If you boner by looking at trees swaying in the wind, they take that into consideration.
Quote from: Josephus on April 13, 2010, 06:32:01 PM
Can we go back to all the on-forum lawyers debating whether paedophila and homosexuality are linked or not? That was getting interesting. So far, as a neutral jury, being neither gay or a kiddie lover, I'm liking what BB had to say on the matter.
What's the debate? I thought it was pretty clear that they are independant issues.
Some pedophiles like boys, some like girls, and some are indifferent and will take either.
Quote from: Malthus on April 14, 2010, 09:45:37 AM
Quote from: Josephus on April 13, 2010, 06:32:01 PM
Can we go back to all the on-forum lawyers debating whether paedophila and homosexuality are linked or not? That was getting interesting. So far, as a neutral jury, being neither gay or a kiddie lover, I'm liking what BB had to say on the matter.
What's the debate? I thought it was pretty clear that they are independant issues.
Some pedophiles like boys, some like girls, and some are indifferent and will take either.
And the ones that like boys are gays.
I was alluding to a four point argument that Marti made, that was nicely quashed by BB (granted you don't need a law degree to do that
Incidently no one has touched on this point:
Many pedophiles tend not to be gender specific. They like children. Not boys, not girls. Children. Sexually speaking there is not THAT much difference between a three year old boy and a three year old girl. Because most of the perpetrators tend to be men, they tend to have more access to boys (sports teams, etc) and thus there is the allusion that they might be gay.
Quote from: Josephus on April 14, 2010, 10:33:01 AM
I was alluding to a four point argument that Marti made, that was nicely quashed by BB (granted you don't need a law degree to do that
Incidently no one has touched on this point:
Many pedophiles tend not to be gender specific. They like children. Not boys, not girls. Children. Sexually speaking there is not THAT much difference between a three year old boy and a three year old girl. Because most of the perpetrators tend to be men, they tend to have more access to boys (sports teams, etc) and thus there is the allusion that they might be gay.
Yeah, it's a good point: if pedophiles (or a good portion of them) simply don't care about the gender of the kids they are abusing, the illusion will be presented that more are "gay" than the general population, because (even leaving aside the fact that adult men are more likely to have access to boys) gay men are not 50% of the general population.
Quote from: Siege on April 14, 2010, 10:30:23 AM
And the ones that like boys are gays.
It doesn't appear to work that way. Liking prepubescent children sexually seems, from the evidence, to be a seperate category of sexuality - for example, some of those men who abuse young boys also have sexual relations with (adult) women, never (adult) men.
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 13, 2010, 08:20:50 PM
I dont know of any studies linking homosexuality to a propensity for pedophilia. I doubt it exists. I think it more likely that pedophiles are equal opportunity abusers. Take Clifford Olsen for example.
Well that goes back to the initial point I was disagreeing with Marty about. As far as I know you can't characterize pedophiles - some only like little boys, some only like little girls, and some are equal opportunity abusers.
Quote from: Barrister on April 14, 2010, 11:14:05 AM
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 13, 2010, 08:20:50 PM
I dont know of any studies linking homosexuality to a propensity for pedophilia. I doubt it exists. I think it more likely that pedophiles are equal opportunity abusers. Take Clifford Olsen for example.
Well that goes back to the initial point I was disagreeing with Marty about. As far as I know you can't characterize pedophiles - some only like little boys, some only like little girls, and some are equal opportunity abusers.
Haven't seen the evidence about only liking one sex. The lengthy report I posted a link to suggests that pedophiles are attracted to both boys and girls. It is their pre-pubescence that is the attraction not their gender. It may be that a particular pedophile had only male or female victims but that is likely a function of opportunity rather then desire.
Quote from: Josephus on April 14, 2010, 10:33:01 AM
I was alluding to a four point argument that Marti made, that was nicely quashed by BB (granted you don't need a law degree to do that
What the fuck are you talking about? He didn't "quash" anything - he addressed one point out of 4 and quoted some anecdotal evidence - nothing more.
Quote from: Barrister on April 13, 2010, 06:48:02 PM
Plus most of what I know is from either a really interesting, but only 2 hour long, talk by a psychiatrist who studied in particular adolescent sexual offenders, plus a large number, but purely anecdotal, experience in dealing with allegations of sexual offences.
It is questionable whether an adolescent sex offender could even be regarded as a pedophile - a 17 yo having sex with a 14 yo is definitely not a pedophile - it's just one teen boning another.
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 14, 2010, 11:22:41 AM
Quote from: Barrister on April 14, 2010, 11:14:05 AM
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 13, 2010, 08:20:50 PM
I dont know of any studies linking homosexuality to a propensity for pedophilia. I doubt it exists. I think it more likely that pedophiles are equal opportunity abusers. Take Clifford Olsen for example.
Well that goes back to the initial point I was disagreeing with Marty about. As far as I know you can't characterize pedophiles - some only like little boys, some only like little girls, and some are equal opportunity abusers.
Haven't seen the evidence about only liking one sex. The lengthy report I posted a link to suggests that pedophiles are attracted to both boys and girls. It is their pre-pubescence that is the attraction not their gender. It may be that a particular pedophile had only male or female victims but that is likely a function of opportunity rather then desire.
That is my understanding as well. And for the reasons I mentioned, pedophiles will probably have more opportunities to get access to kids of the same gender than of the opposite gender.
Quote from: Martinus on April 14, 2010, 11:58:44 AM
Quote from: Barrister on April 13, 2010, 06:48:02 PM
Plus most of what I know is from either a really interesting, but only 2 hour long, talk by a psychiatrist who studied in particular adolescent sexual offenders, plus a large number, but purely anecdotal, experience in dealing with allegations of sexual offences.
It is questionable whether an adolescent sex offender could even be regarded as a pedophile - a 17 yo having sex with a 14 yo is definitely not a pedophile - it's just one teen boning another.
I've been dealing with a case of a 14 year old having sex with a 10 year old. I consulted with several experts who all said 'it depends'. The kid could be a budding pedophile, or not. We're in the midst of getting the kid assessed to try and find out.
You can't generalize in talking about sex offenders.
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 14, 2010, 09:39:46 AM
Quote from: Josephus on April 14, 2010, 07:11:41 AM
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 13, 2010, 09:12:11 PM
Quote from: Josephus on April 13, 2010, 09:09:22 PM
Quote from: DGuller on April 13, 2010, 07:04:09 PM
If there is one job that would attract pedophiles/gays even more than priesthood, it would have to be the job of administrating the PPG tests.
There is such a thing? For real? Isn't a boner, a boner? Can boners be quantified? Measured? Studied? Contemplated? Analysed....Anal...heh, I said anal..
Yep, it has been a standard test for detecting sexual deviancy for some time. Basically you flash pictures and see what response you get.
I don't think it's a fair test. Some people are naturally more inclined to boners easier than others. For instance, a couple years ago I----wait...I'm not going to tell languish that story.
There is a base line taken first. If you boner by looking at trees swaying in the wind, they take that into consideration.
Apparently it can be somewhat challenging to use the PPG on your males (18 or so), becausesome of them will get a boner over anything and everything.
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 14, 2010, 11:22:41 AM
Quote from: Barrister on April 14, 2010, 11:14:05 AM
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 13, 2010, 08:20:50 PM
I dont know of any studies linking homosexuality to a propensity for pedophilia. I doubt it exists. I think it more likely that pedophiles are equal opportunity abusers. Take Clifford Olsen for example.
Well that goes back to the initial point I was disagreeing with Marty about. As far as I know you can't characterize pedophiles - some only like little boys, some only like little girls, and some are equal opportunity abusers.
Haven't seen the evidence about only liking one sex. The lengthy report I posted a link to suggests that pedophiles are attracted to both boys and girls. It is their pre-pubescence that is the attraction not their gender. It may be that a particular pedophile had only male or female victims but that is likely a function of opportunity rather then desire.
I can only site the one psychiatrist from the Ontario Crown School session on Sex and Domestic Violence II who said otherwise.
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 14, 2010, 11:22:41 AM
Haven't seen the evidence about only liking one sex. The lengthy report I posted a link to suggests that pedophiles are attracted to both boys and girls. It is their pre-pubescence that is the attraction not their gender. It may be that a particular pedophile had only male or female victims but that is likely a function of opportunity rather then desire.
I've certainly seen anecdotal reports concerning abusers who only appear to like children of one gender or another. I don't think they are all the same in being indifferent - though certainly, many are.
Point being that even if they all were indifferent, it would still give the wholly inaccurate illusion that homosexuality was linked to pedophilia, simply because all else being equal, if pedos who molest boys are labelled as "gay", then they would far outnumber in percentage of total pedophiles the number of gay men as a percentage of total men.
Quote from: Barrister on April 14, 2010, 12:16:52 PM
Apparently it can be somewhat challenging to use the PPG on your males (18 or so), becausesome of them will get a boner over anything and everything.
I would think so. A young man's imagination would turn anything he's seeing into something he'd rather be seeing when it comes to sex.
Quote from: Barrister on April 14, 2010, 12:15:14 PM
I've been dealing with a case of a 14 year old having sex with a 10 year old. I consulted with several experts who all said 'it depends'. The kid could be a budding pedophile, or not. We're in the midst of getting the kid assessed to try and find out.
You can't generalize in talking about sex offenders.
What kind of assessments? Do they include boner tests?
Quote from: Josephus on April 14, 2010, 02:10:30 PM
Quote from: Barrister on April 14, 2010, 12:15:14 PM
I've been dealing with a case of a 14 year old having sex with a 10 year old. I consulted with several experts who all said 'it depends'. The kid could be a budding pedophile, or not. We're in the midst of getting the kid assessed to try and find out.
You can't generalize in talking about sex offenders.
What kind of assessments? Do they include boner tests?
Not quite sure what kind of assessment will be done (I don't have the results yet, and I'm uncomfortable talking about the case in any event), but no - as I understand it it was determined that using the PPG test would be unethical on a minor, since it involves showing a series of sexually provocative images and sounds to a young person (even though the images themselves are PG rated).
Quote from: Josephus on April 14, 2010, 02:10:30 PM
Quote from: Barrister on April 14, 2010, 12:15:14 PM
I've been dealing with a case of a 14 year old having sex with a 10 year old. I consulted with several experts who all said 'it depends'. The kid could be a budding pedophile, or not. We're in the midst of getting the kid assessed to try and find out.
You can't generalize in talking about sex offenders.
What kind of assessments? Do they include boner tests?
You seemed quite concerned about this whole PPG issue.
By the way, as a law clerk, I saw a personal injury case where a young man claiming an accident caused impotance fooled the PPG test. The opposite of your boner if the wind picks up theory.
The thing that caught him is there were witnesses that testified he had sex with a candy striper at least 3 times a day while in the hospital recovering from the car accident...
Quote from: Martinus on April 14, 2010, 11:55:40 AM
Quote from: Josephus on April 14, 2010, 10:33:01 AM
I was alluding to a four point argument that Marti made, that was nicely quashed by BB (granted you don't need a law degree to do that
What the fuck are you talking about? He didn't "quash" anything - he addressed one point out of 4 and quoted some anecdotal evidence - nothing more.
Totally quashed. Quashed like Squash.
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 14, 2010, 02:25:40 PM
You seemed quite concerned about this whole PPG issue.
Not concerned so much; just amazed that such a thing exists. I guess I don't get out much. It just seems so Clockwork Orange, does it not?
Quote from: Josephus on April 14, 2010, 02:55:06 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 14, 2010, 02:25:40 PM
You seemed quite concerned about this whole PPG issue.
Not concerned so much; just amazed that such a thing exists. I guess I don't get out much. It just seems so Clockwork Orange, does it not?
It's the best way to measure a reaction to sexual stimuli, and it's evidence has passed the
Daubert test and been accepted in court.
But yeah, it is somewhat amusing.
QuoteDaubert test
Did it pass the Dilbert test?
Quote from: Ed Anger on April 14, 2010, 03:39:56 PM
QuoteDaubert test
Did it pass the Dilbert test?
YEs - I believe merely mentioning a scientific device that measures the tumescence of a penis manages to get more laughs theen the entire back catalogue of Dilbert comics.
Quote from: Barrister on April 14, 2010, 12:15:14 PM
Quote from: Martinus on April 14, 2010, 11:58:44 AM
Quote from: Barrister on April 13, 2010, 06:48:02 PM
Plus most of what I know is from either a really interesting, but only 2 hour long, talk by a psychiatrist who studied in particular adolescent sexual offenders, plus a large number, but purely anecdotal, experience in dealing with allegations of sexual offences.
It is questionable whether an adolescent sex offender could even be regarded as a pedophile - a 17 yo having sex with a 14 yo is definitely not a pedophile - it's just one teen boning another.
I've been dealing with a case of a 14 year old having sex with a 10 year old. I consulted with several experts who all said 'it depends'. The kid could be a budding pedophile, or not. We're in the midst of getting the kid assessed to try and find out.
You can't generalize in talking about sex offenders.
See, this is the kind of moronic mindset I am talking about here. How do you even determine which one is a "sex offender" if both of them are minors?
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 14, 2010, 02:25:40 PM
he had sex with a candy striper at least 3 times a day while in the hospital recovering from the car accident...
No. Fucking. Way.
Quote from: Martinus on April 14, 2010, 05:15:43 PM
See, this is the kind of moronic mindset I am talking about here. How do you even determine which one is a "sex offender" if both of them are minors?
If one of them is non-consenting, the other is the offender.
??
That'd be my guess.
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on April 14, 2010, 05:20:17 PM
Quote from: Martinus on April 14, 2010, 05:15:43 PM
See, this is the kind of moronic mindset I am talking about here. How do you even determine which one is a "sex offender" if both of them are minors?
If one of them is non-consenting, the other is the offender.
??
That'd be my guess.
you do realize that minors are considered unable to give consent, so your response is retarded.
BB didn't say the 14 yo raped the 10 yo but "had sex with". I am going to assume there was no coercion.
Quote from: Martinus on April 14, 2010, 05:15:43 PM
See, this is the kind of moronic mindset I am talking about here. How do you even determine which one is a "sex offender" if both of them are minors?
I am not at all comfortable discussing this file and will say nothing more, other than there is plenty more that I am not telling you, both in the facts and in how our office is dealing with it.
Lets discuss it in the back room where Mart has no access. And talk behind his back also.
Quote from: Ed Anger on April 14, 2010, 05:39:13 PM
Lets discuss it in the back room where Mart has no access.
No.
Quote
And talk behind his back also.
Now you're talking...
Quote from: Barrister on April 14, 2010, 05:38:04 PM
Quote from: Martinus on April 14, 2010, 05:15:43 PM
See, this is the kind of moronic mindset I am talking about here. How do you even determine which one is a "sex offender" if both of them are minors?
I am not at all comfortable discussing this file and will say nothing more, other than there is plenty more that I am not telling you, both in the facts and in how our office is dealing with it.
Fine. Perhaps you shouldn't bring up such examples then if, when called on their inconsistency or lack of logic, you hide behind secrecy?
Ok answer my general question earlier then - if two teenagers have sex with each other, and there is no evidence of rape, is any of them (both?) a sexual offender?
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 13, 2010, 08:20:50 PM
I think it more likely that pedophiles are equal opportunity abusers. Take Clifford Olsen for example.
doubt that.
Heard the testimony of one pedophile, caught by an undercover journalist, and he was showing the journalist his pictures with his pedo friends, describing their preferences. Some like older boys, some prefered girls, and another one he said "a 5 year old doesn't bother him".
Sort of like serial killers. A serial killer picks his targets according to is mo and usually sticks with it.
Or a guy who's into mens feet.
Quote from: Martinus on April 14, 2010, 05:15:43 PM
See, this is the kind of moronic mindset I am talking about here. How do you even determine which one is a "sex offender" if both of them are minors?
probably the same way you determine if a 14 year old committing another crime can be judged has an adult.
Quote from: Razgovory on April 14, 2010, 09:42:54 PM
Or a guy who's into mens feet.
that would be really creapy. Such guys should be jailed immediatly, to prevent future abuses. I think they're closer to psychopaths than anything else.
Did you have someone particular in mind?
;)
Quote from: Martinus on April 14, 2010, 05:41:38 PM
Fine. Perhaps you shouldn't bring up such examples then if, when called on their inconsistency or lack of logic, you hide behind secrecy?
Ok answer my general question earlier then - if two teenagers have sex with each other, and there is no evidence of rape, is any of them (both?) a sexual offender?
You continue to be daft.
You say to BB that you cant understand why one might be considered a sexual offender (which is incredibly stupid since anyone with an ounce of common sense can figure out a number of factual circumstances as to why that might be) and then you accuse BB of being inconsistent because he wont give you details he is obligated by law not to disclose.
I am now convinced that you got your law degree from a cracker jack box.
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 14, 2010, 10:00:34 PM
I am now convinced that you got your law degree from a cracker jack box.
Doubtful. You can probably get a better legal education from a Cracker Jack box than from a Polish law school.
Quote from: Martinus on April 14, 2010, 05:41:38 PM
Fine. Perhaps you shouldn't bring up such examples then if, when called on their inconsistency or lack of logic, you hide behind secrecy?
Ok answer my general question earlier then - if two teenagers have sex with each other, and there is no evidence of rape, is any of them (both?) a sexual offender?
My example was only brought up to show that even when I could talk to experts about a real life situation and real life facts, they could only tell me "it depends". This is complicated stuff.
As for your second paragraph - it depends. First of all it's a mistake to take of evidence of rape - something can be a rape without there being any evidence. Second it depends on specific circumstances. It could be a sex offence, or it could not be.
I think you should violate your professional ethics because Marty is throwing a fit.
Quote from: viper37 on April 14, 2010, 09:48:32 PM
Quote from: Martinus on April 14, 2010, 05:15:43 PM
See, this is the kind of moronic mindset I am talking about here. How do you even determine which one is a "sex offender" if both of them are minors?
probably the same way you determine if a 14 year old committing another crime can be judged has an adult.
Are you really that retarded? you do not understand the difference between murder and a formal crime (i.e. sex with a minor) when both parties are minors?
When an adult kills another person it is clear who the victim and the perpetrator is. When a 14 yo kills someone then it is obvious who the victim and the perpetrator is.
When an adult has sex with a 14 yo without coercion being involved it is clear who the perpetrator and the victim is. When a 14 yo has sex with a 13 yo without coercion being involved who is the victim and the perpetrator? Both? None? Either?
I love it when Poles call people from the civilized world "retarded."
Quote from: Josephus on April 15, 2010, 07:17:30 AM
I love it when Poles call people from the civilized world "retarded."
More to the point, I love it when Marti thinks other people are retarded.
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 15, 2010, 10:11:28 AM
Quote from: Josephus on April 15, 2010, 07:17:30 AM
I love it when Poles call people from the civilized world "retarded."
More to the point, I love it when Marti thinks other people are retarded.
He just doesn't like to have sex with scumbag Catholics.
Quote from: Martinus on April 15, 2010, 03:57:58 AM
When an adult kills another person it is clear who the victim and the perpetrator is. When a 14 yo kills someone then it is obvious who the victim and the perpetrator is.
I wish I lived in Martinus-land where it is always "clear" who the victim and the perpetrator are. It would save the numerous arguments, dicussions and debates we routinely have in trying to determine who should be charged in a given set of facts.
Hey, gays aren't to blame for the Catholic Church's pedophilia scandal.
Jews are!
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article7095471.ece
:lol:
We're a tricky lot, evidently. :secret:
Jews, they want to take the credit for everything.
Quote from: Josephus on April 15, 2010, 01:21:36 PM
Jews, they want to take the credit for everything.
Oh, they give credit, too, but only at extortionate rates. :P
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.frumsatire.net%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2009%2F01%2Fgay-black-kkk.jpg&hash=6365fc89c83fe6936522c1e14ad817674b706c2f)
Quote from: Syt on April 15, 2010, 01:41:20 PM
Quote from: Josephus on April 15, 2010, 01:21:36 PM
Jews, they want to take the credit for everything.
Oh, they give credit, too, but only at extortionate rates. :P
:lol:
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 14, 2010, 10:00:34 PM
I am now convinced that you got your law degree from a cracker jack box.
if they ever hire a Polish lawyer at your firm, be afraid. Be very afraid.
:D
Quote from: Martinus on April 15, 2010, 03:57:58 AM
Are you really that retarded? you do not understand the difference between murder and a formal crime (i.e. sex with a minor) when both parties are minors?
When a minor commits a crime, he is to be judged in front of a "youth tribunal". If the crime is serious enough, the prosecution can request that he be tried in an adult's tribunal by proving he knows the difference between right or wrong. I don't know the specifics, but I think the prosecution then needs to prove the young men/girl is mature enough to be judged as an adult.
I suppose a similar principle would be applied in a case of a minor sleeping with another, younger minor. There can be multiple circumstances why it could be a rape or not. Even if both say they were consentant, how did the 10 year old achieve consent? I suppose for you, a 14 yo fucking a 10yo is just normal stuff that everyone should try. :rolleyes: But for pedophiles, there is also this process called "grooming" where they convince the children of having sex with them over a period of time.
There was a case on tv, where a Montreal pedophile was caught on camera, he admitted that he was a very patient man, and he could take as much as 2 years to approach a kid and finally convince the little boy to get in bed with him. In one case he said it took only 10 minutes and he never reported him. He also said that he always knew he was a pedophile since he was already attracted to younger boys when he was 14 himself
So, did the 14 and 10 year old spontaneously decided to have sex? Did the 14 year old suggested over a certain period of time that they could have sex together and it would be cool? Was it the 10 year old who initiated the sex? Is the 14 year old in
That's a series of questions wich could be asked and would determine if the 14 year old is a sexual agressor or simply an homosexual who likes younger 'men'.
I suppose for homos it's not clear cut as it would be for heteros, but I can't imagine myself at 14 being attracted to a 10 year old girl, while you imply that it's just normal sex discovering their sexuality.
Quote
When an adult kills another person it is clear who the victim and the perpetrator is. When a 14 yo kills someone then it is obvious who the victim and the perpetrator is.
so, if a 14 year old is recruited by a street gang to kill a 21 year old from a rival gang, there's absolutely no way the 21yo could claim self defense because that's clear who the victim is and who the perprator is.
It seems to be a weird justice system you have there in Poland, but not being a lawyer, who am I to judge?
Quote
When an adult has sex with a 14 yo without coercion being involved it is clear who the perpetrator and the victim is. When a 14 yo has sex with a 13 yo without coercion being involved who is the victim and the perpetrator? Both? None? Either?
Again, there are multiple possibilites. I once heard of a 13 year old making repeated advances to his teacher until she finally agreed to have sex with him. Who's the perpetrator?
Of course, the teacher is guilty, she should have refrained from it. But it's not really a rape either.
As for your example of a 13 year old and 14 year old having sex, knowing personally a case where it happenned, the 13 year old girl tricked the older boy (18) to become pregnant. But in other cases, it could be the opposite, it could be a rape, it could have been "grooming", it could have been a lot of thing, hence why BB says in his case there is no definitive "one size fits all" answers.
There is certainly the need for a psychiatric evaluation if the crime is reported. I assume that if a 13 an 14 year old boys decide to have sex together as part of their teenage desires to explore sex, they won't necessarly looked troubled as if one of them had been raped, they won't press charges against the other, and they won't tell anyone right away. So, if no crime is reported, I suppose it's consensual.
Quote from: Barrister on April 15, 2010, 10:57:14 AM
I wish I lived in Martinus-land where it is always "clear" who the victim and the perpetrator are. It would save the numerous arguments, dicussions and debates we routinely have in trying to determine who should be charged in a given set of facts.
I believe in Poland the verdict is always determined beforehand, and the purpose of the proceedings was not justice in the Human sense but bringing the offender to recognize the power and benevolence of the State.
Quote from: viper37 on April 15, 2010, 04:25:24 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 14, 2010, 10:00:34 PM
I am now convinced that you got your law degree from a cracker jack box.
if they ever hire a Polish lawyer at your firm, be afraid. Be very afraid.
:D
Since I do the hiring, it aint going to happen.
Quote from: viper37 on April 15, 2010, 05:12:49 PM
Quote from: Barrister on April 15, 2010, 10:57:14 AM
I wish I lived in Martinus-land where it is always "clear" who the victim and the perpetrator are. It would save the numerous arguments, dicussions and debates we routinely have in trying to determine who should be charged in a given set of facts.
I believe in Poland the verdict is always determined beforehand, and the purpose of the proceedings was not justice in the Human sense but bringing the offender to recognize the power and benevolence of the State.
That explains many of Marti's legal views.
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 15, 2010, 08:53:25 PM
Quote from: viper37 on April 15, 2010, 04:25:24 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 14, 2010, 10:00:34 PM
I am now convinced that you got your law degree from a cracker jack box.
if they ever hire a Polish lawyer at your firm, be afraid. Be very afraid.
:D
Since I do the hiring, it aint going to happen.
Gimmie a job then. I already have a place To stay down there in Van.
Hire me CC! One always needs an assistant.
Well, I will consider it. You have better creditentials then the Polish lawyer applicants.
One of these days I'm going to snap and send you a resume, just to see what you do with it... :shifty:
Quote from: Barrister on April 16, 2010, 03:46:03 PM
One of these days I'm going to snap and send you a resume, just to see what you do with it... :shifty:
After all these years of running your own cases I dont think you would enjoy starting over as a commercial litigation junior. My bet is that you become a judge long before I ever have a chance of seeing your resume.
Quote from: Barrister on April 13, 2010, 04:09:58 PM
That grumbler doesn't think he's trolling.
You are correct. When I am trolling, I know it, and so does everyone else. :smarty:
Quote from: Barrister on April 13, 2010, 04:23:40 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on April 13, 2010, 04:14:37 PM
Now he's going to quote your quoting error.
Meh - I make quoting errors (and spelling errors, and grammar errors), all the time.
As do it, which is why I don't make a big deal about it. Some exceptions apply.
Quote from: katmai on April 16, 2010, 12:14:48 AM
Gimmie a job then. I already have a place To stay down there in Van.
CC lives in Turkey? Or do you plan on commuting by plane every week?
Quote from: Malthus on April 15, 2010, 01:06:38 PM
Hey, gays aren't to blame for the Catholic Church's pedophilia scandal.
Jews are!
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article7095471.ece
:lol:
We're a tricky lot, evidently. :secret:
Never fails, doesn't it? Give the Catholic Church enough time and they will eventually hit all the boxes. :D
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 16, 2010, 03:44:28 PM
Well, I will consider it. You have better creditentials then the Polish lawyer applicants.
Not sure if I would like to have an illiterate as my coworker so don't worry - I won't apply. :)
Quote from: Martinus on April 17, 2010, 03:25:38 AM
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 16, 2010, 03:44:28 PM
Well, I will consider it. You have better creditentials then the Polish lawyer applicants.
Not sure if I would like to have an illiterate as my coworker so don't worry - I won't apply. :)
:face:
Quote from: Habbaku on April 17, 2010, 02:01:38 AM
CC lives in Turkey? Or do you plan on commuting by plane every week?
:rolleyes: