Category: Let's talk
Hi all,
Thought I'd share this in the spirit of education. Trigger warnings apply. a fantastic piece on a pedophile group whose members odn't actually want to hurt anyone.
https://medium.com/matter/youre-16-youre-a-pedophile-you-dont-want-to-hurt-anyone-what-do-you-do-now-e11ce4b88bdb
thoughts?
I've always said that people can't help what turns them on. They can only do their best to control how they react and what they do about it. I think this goes beyond what the normal straight or even gay people can comprehend. If you're a straight man, ask yourself how you would deal with it if you were suddenly in a place where having sex with women was not only rong and taboo, but most people would even be disgusted to know of anyone who did it. Same applies for gay guys. The temptation is all around, but we're suddenly in a place where we'd be total outcasts for acting on it. After years, just imagine the sexual frustration.
This goes deeper than that. Children, especially so young, could never understand what's being offered or done. They might know what feels good, but they can't really consent. This guy realizes it and realizes his attraction, but is trying his best not only to fight it, but to help others in the same predicament to fight it as well and showing them that they're not alone.
Well, at least if you are trying not to hurt anyone, you'll be what you will be.
I see poster 2's points, but I think the line gets drawn due to the child not being able to consent.
If a child could be proven to actually know exactly what there doing, and why, I would have to give that relationship a pass, but they often times don't.
Specially at 3 to 8?
I have no idea where the age of consent should be, but if it is actual consent, it works for me.
I think in this sexual area, the person simple has to control it, or find a consenting person that is actually older, but appears child like, or small.
I couldn't fault someone for having the feelings, only harming the child.
It is like stealing. You might want to do it, but you don't, so this seems to be about the same.
Sure, you could easily say it is only wrong because it is not socially acceptable, such as sex with women, but in this case this goes further then social, because the kids can't consent.
Exactly. I'm definitely not saying that any young child should be exploited just because an adult feels an attraction. I'm just saying that it's noble of this guy to know what he's attracted to and be trying to fight against it and help others do the same.
Well, here are my thoughts.
It is trigger yes. But being forewarned, I merely set my jaw and read through it.
My conclusion is I think they're on the right track. Stop it while they're young. And it's sad for these kids, though they are noble not to give in. I hope they can find the help they're looking for.
And I hope we can discover what maladaptive qualities make this happen. It sounds like they're talking about a biological phenomenon. It's clearly maladaptive to the species, to say nothing of the victim of course. But if the maladaptation can be found, it could be fixed. I agree, though, not with something that looks like the gay reparative junk science stuff.
I won't dignify this post by reading the article you suggest. It is easy to dress this up as a sexual fantasy or fetish that lies outside the mainstream. Many people have fetishes or fantasies that they hesitate to tell their dates about, for fear they may be laughed out of the room. The problem with pedophiles is that your fantasies inherently involve harming people, psychologically at a minimum, and forcing people to engage in activities to which they do not have the capacity to consent. You are therefore not innocent fetishists hoping someday to realize your fantasies. You are very sick people who require treatment.
That's what this guy is seaking, and helping others to seak as well. Since you didn't read the article, you clearly have missed the point here.
I read the article, and I think this is beyond sick, for the reason Darren mentioned.
um...I'm confused though? How is acknowledgment of a problem and saying, I need help, in any way sick? do you believe these guys choose the fantasies they have? I'm genuinely asking. If so, why would they choose such a thing, just to become martirs by not acting on it? Of course, the fantasies themselves are sick and messed up...but the desire to reintegrate and become normal...um...how is that sick?
So the guy has this fetish. He chose to seek help for it. His other options are to try to control it on his own and hope that he never gives in, or just say the hell with it and give in and molest as many kids as he can before he gets caught. Which option would be preferable to the one he chose?
let me clarify, since you all don't seem to get what I, and Darren, I'm sure, were getting at.
being a pedophile is what's sick.
the guy in this article is talking about it openly, which I honestly don't believe does a damn bit of good, nor is it anything that should be praised.
if anything, he's causing more problems for himself, cause people will likely avoid him, or otherwise give him a hard time, due to what he has now shared with the world.
Yes, but let's explore the alternatives. what if he kept quiet and earned the trust of the community and decided to open a daycare? Would this have been a better option?
Being a pedophile is absolutely sick. There was stuff in this article that turned my stomach, and that's an understatement. I have no idea how the hell someone could have these urges, but I've got to hand it to this guy for seeking the help before he acts, and for understanding that there is no good to be had in sexual activity with a child. The one that makes me sick in this article is the guy they call Mike, who has these urges but works as a pre-school teacher? The names I called that guy are things I shouldn't write here. Perhaps that dude should find the sawed-off shotgun he speaks of and take care of it rather than teach kids.
It was at least refreshing to see an article that didn't try to justify pedophilia, or say why there are instances it's ok, or crap like that. At least this guy knows how wrong it is, and is doing what he can to stay in control of it. I may think he's a sick fuck for having the desires in the first place, but I have to give credit to someone who knows how wrong it is and actively works to overcome it.
I decided to read the article. I was encouraged. I thought it would be an apologetic saying, "Well I am a pedophile but I swear I don't want to hurt anyone! It's just who I am." That would have been very shallow. But the guy was saying, "I am a pedophile, I know this is a mental illness and I want to seek help for it." Anyone who has that genuine spirit, and who is able to follow it through, does deserve encouragement.
And, I echo Dawn's and Chelsea's sentiments 100 percent.
Paedophile activism should have ended when the Paedophile Information Exchange was shut down.
It is a known tactic of paedophiles to create academic arguments for forms of paedophilia in the hope of getting other people to accept paedophilia. If they are challenged, they will respond dismissively to those who express opposing views.
In this thread, the discussion is about harmless forms of paedophilia, the argument being if it is harmless it should be accepted. Who should decide whether these forms of paedophilia are harmless? The paedophiles of course.
Why don't they hand over their computers, mobile phones, paedophile videos and literature to the police and let them decide?
Alicia, I agree about being sickened by the article. It produces any number of natural biological responses, including but not limited to feeling like you were punched in the gut, nausea, heart racing, sweating, and the tingly fearful flight or fight response where one cannot get away.
What nobody's talking about are the therapists who try and help these people overcome their pedophilia. That job has to be seriously hazardous to one's well-being. All well and good for us who read the article, close the browser and dismiss it, waiting for the gutache to go away. But for those people who are actually invested in trying to help the pedophiles overcome this and get better, that's got to be one of the hardest jobs there is. We just read the article, over the internet. No doubt they hear considerably more and are hearing about it face to face.
I definitely agree with Alicia RE the fellow teaching at a preschool. What the hell is that all about?
Senior I don't think they're claiming there's no harm. In fact quite the opposite: their support group encourages pedophiles to get rid of the child pornography and stay off it.
I could definitely understand being in that situation and simply turning myself off via self-termination of one form or another. Most of us don't have desires that can totally destroy another person. Since this topic is already controversial enough, I'll go out on a limb here and say, voluntary, safe, euthanasia in that situation should be available. What happens if you just can't take it anymore? You're just going to crumble inside under the weight? Wouldn't it be more humane to let the guy check in somewhere and go to sleep? Beats his family or someone else finding a dead body with a gaping shotgun wound.
So the message would be: You don't have to live this way. Try therapy and if it works, great, you're out and cured. If not, there's an option that's safe and affordable, you can self-terminate, make your exit cleanly and safely, with minimal damage to your family.
Just some additional thoughts after thinking about this a bit.
What we want is a solution that results in fewer kids being abused, and that would do it. Therapy with a one-way-ticket option if you're finding therapy isn't doing it. I can think of a couple ways already which wouldn't require medical oversight, would be painless and not really scary way to go. Think your noble gases like helium or nitrogen, plus a pressure tank and a mask. That would be one exit strategy with minimal damage to other humans who found the body, no pain, just euphoria. Think nitrogen narcosis, something divers can suffer when underwater too long. Not the bends, it's when they're way down there. You basically get high because your brain is starved of oxygen. Only unlike carbon monoxide, you have no headaches: it works really fast comparatively.
call me cynical, call me any other name you can think of, but I'm not the slightest bit convinced that the fact pedophiles are in a group that's supposed to help them change, will actually do so.
at the end of the day, they'll still be pedophiles, not to mention, there's also no telling that they won't eventually act out their fantasies, due to having such strong desires.
people on the outside looking in may wanna help them, in any way they can, whether they're therapists, or people in completely different lines of work. however, I honestly don't think there's such a thing as help for pedophiles, for the above reasons I stated.
They 100% should not be teaching, or any other activity near children. It is like highering an alcoholic to work at the liquor store.
So, Chelsea, what do you think of my euthanasia solution?
Not being hostile, just a thought experiment.
So a guy claims he's a pedophile, goes to therapy. Claims it isn't working. Can freely check in and volunteer for a spell in a helium hyperbolic chamber where he gets high for a few seconds, passes out and dies.
I actually think you're on to something greater than your post, though: Right now, if we release them into the community, the community doesn't want them after they've done prison time. We then have to house them and monitor them on state money. Wonder how many would take the one-way express if they knew it was a comfortable ride, just fade off into oblivion?
Isn't it illegal to download kiddie porn? Like the person who spoke with the first kid completely skipped that. I understand now that one cannot help what turns them on, but they need a consequence to realize that this is never, ever, never, ever ok to do. They say they don't want to hurt anyone and are...god so disgusting...getting off to innocent children being molested!!! ! The kid needed to hear a baby screaming in pain to be shocked by it? Well it sure didn't stop him from jerking off to something that may have been more tolerable later on. Sorry folks but that's very telling. and the guy mike now an adult teaching children...nobody thought to report him for downloading child porn and alert the school so they can be aware and take action. I appreciate that there are mental health professionals who do the best they can to help people cope with these desires, but I've read about this till my head hurt and the consensus from the mouths of pedofiles is that there is nothing that can be done about the attraction they have to children. Not therapy, not prison, that's how they are, that's how they'll stay. So, if they can't download the porn, or live out their fantacies in reality, nobody but their own kind will accept and understand them then what?
leo, I think the suggestion you posed is perfect. although, considering I think there's no hope for pedophiles to begin with, they should do it right off the bat.
that would save themselves, and society as a whole, a lot of heartache.
also, I think senior said it best, that the only people who will, and do, justify pedophilia, are pedophiles themselves.
some kind of surgical/chemical castration to completely remove the sexual desire is the most humane solution I've read suggested.
It is not legal to download kiddie porn, or such pictures.
I read this article a few days back, but I think he talks about how he gets around detection.
lmao. onlo paedophiles justify helping paedophiles with their attractions...only gay people advocate for gay rights and only women want equality for their gender! of course!
hi5 brings up a good suggestion, which I didn't remember reading, anywhere in this topic.
I do think getting rid of a pedophile's ability to be sexually aroused, period, is a great solution. however, I'm sure most of them wouldn't go for that, if they knew it were likely, which is why I say leo's suggestion is still the best one.
I think you're generalizing a little, Burmuta. I can garontee you both women and gay people have tons of supporters who are not in their dynamic. heck, you even mildly disagree with homosexuality and you're automatically branded an intolerant homophobe by some. As for Pedofiles, there is never an instance where such behavior is justified. The practice is a violation on so many levels. It is rape, or a form thereof, and there is never an instance where rape is justified. In truth, I'd not shed any tears if rapists were removed from the world; I have no tolerence for that kind of behavior because it can be so devistating. But we are primarily a society which believes in rehabilitating devient behavior. Yet we often find it difficult to separate the person from their deeds. In truth it is not always possible to do so, and a form of judgement is necessary to preserve one's safety. I think having them be registered is a good first step, and that has already been put into practice. But I believe pedofelia also to be a mental illness, or even an addiction. We treat both of them, or at least we try to. I see no reason why we can not attempt to do the same with pedofiles. Now that said, caution does need to be maintained. You wouldn't have a reformed and rehabilitated pedofile opening a day care, or teaching in a school, just like you wouldn't want a reformed alcaholic working in an establishment where alcohol is readily available. The trick is to ensure such motivations and addictions can not interfere with recovery. That would be difficult, and that I'm aware of there is no pedofiles anonomous. The urges come from the mind. Those urges need to be taken away somehow. Because even forced castration, while it might help the problem, won't stop bad touching and devient thoughts.
The other problem, of course was already stated. Criminals, even rehabilitated ones are still tainted in the public eye. No matter how much a person changes, if people find out they've got a criminal past at all, let alone a past including pedofelia, their lives will never be the same.
I think rape is a bit strong for all. Some actually believe the child enjoys it.
In some cases, this is actually true.
It feels good to the child, and that child perceives it as a form of love, or whatever.
But, because it isn't actually, I'd say it is abuse. The child can't consent.
I'm not saying it is ever good, not even when it is thought to feel good, but rape, I'm not so sure all of it is.
The situation in the Catholic church shows better what I mean.
Many of the boys didn't think they had any problems until they became able to think it over.
That wasn't a religion thing either, just the best way I know to describe what I'm trying to say.
A few things here. Leo, you bring up a point I have been thinking about these last few days: the therapists who work with these people. Given that for years I have wanted to become a licensed therapist, and that I still would like to, I began thinking about that side of it after my emotions and nausea calmed down the other night when I first read this. I started to wonder how I would react if I were a therapist and someone came to my office as this guy Adam came to his first therapist. I'd have a very hard time maintaining professionalism, but I'd have to do it. I am guessing I'd have to refer the person on to someone who could better work with them, as stuff like this would touch off many of my own triggers. But you're right, even for someone who is able to work with a person like this, it still has to be very difficult. Someone needs to, and maybe if I became a therapist I should be strong enough to. I'm just not sure I would be.
Forereel, I completely disagree with you. Rape isn't about whether something feels good, or is perceived to feel good. It's about consent, and a child is unable to consent, therefore, it is rape. Period.
BG, you're right that, if people make a slight comment disagreeing with homosexuality, some people would be all up in arms, branding them homophobic.
however, I disagree with you on one point, which is the fact that castrating pedophiles wouldn't solve the problem of them having such desires, to begin with.
here's why: take transgendered people, for example.
they often wanna have sex change operations, yet, even though they take hormones and such, to make them appear more like the opposite gender, they'll never be that gender, not to mention that the desires they had before their sex change operation, won't be there, either.
so, going back to pedophiles, castrating them would be beneficial cause they wouldn't have those desires, anymore.
I don't mean rape on the side of the child, I mean the pedophile.
Some don't see themselves at taking advantage. Especially if the child enjoys the experience. They'd see it as love.
Pedophiles are not all male, so castrating them doesn't work.
If you lost your testicles, you'd not lose your interest in womencompletely.
Much of sex is mental as well as physical. And what about the women?
BG, I'm afraid my earlier point was slightly misconstrued. what I meant when making the comment about paedophiles wanting to help other paedophiles, gays wanting to help other gays ETC was actually related to the fact that, as a non-gay person, I'm pro gay marriage, homosexuality ETC. So as a non-paedophile, I am pro helping those with those desires who wish never to act on them. The only people for whom I reserve my boundless hatred are those who actually act...then I have no sympathy whatsoever...but if you have thoughts and want to sort out your life, who am I to judge that. I cannot judge the reasons alcoholics drink, as long as they stop and don't ruin my or anyone else's life, who am I to judge why they did it...the key is the desire and follow through of getting help.
That I will agree with.
There's a crowd we haven't covered in this discussion: prosecutors, law enforcement, and
forensics people. We all shut the window, waited for the heartbeat and gut ache to go
away. No such luck for those people!!! They have to pore overy detail, watch every video
and look at every picture. The real nasty part is, these people get hit with PTSD, often in
old age. I admit, watching detective shows when I was younger fed a certain desire to find
the key, unlock the cold case no one else could figure out. But the more I read, outside of
documentaries like "Cold Case Files," I found out about the secret trauma they live with,
often in later life. We're responsible for them at least in part, because they work for us.
And although they do there job, after hours are these prosecutors, law enforcement, and
forensics people actually clear of this behavior?
First, I have to say that I haven’t read the article. So, as such, I don’t know, regarding the article, what I’m talking about. But I’ve been wrestling with something for a number of years now.
Personally, there’s pedophilia, which is the obvious abuse of children, and then there’s a more cloudy issue going on. Speaking just for me, I don’t see how anyone over the age of, say, fourteen, can be attracted to an eight-year-old, or for that matter a ten-year-old. It gets more cloudy when you reach twelve, however, because that’s when puberty strikes nowadays. It was when I reached puberty back in the 70s. And when I was fourteen, I knew I wanted other males. And guess what? At the age of fourteen, I’d’ve been hard-pressed to say that someone in their twenties would not have been attractive to me. One of my greatest fantasies was to have been seduced by an older male in his early to mid-twenties, if not a bit older. When I was in New York City, I knew a guy who was really into a fourteen-year-old boy when he was in his late twenties, and they had an affair that lasted about two years. Was this exploitive? I’m not so sure. Was he a pedophile? I’m not so sure, because it seems to me that a pedophile means being attracted almost exclusively to pre-pubescents, and this guy was attracted to me when I was 23. This same guy that had an affair with a teenager also had several affairs with guys who were older than he. I also knew another guy who was 31 who had a short-lived affair with a fifteen-year-old. A pedophile? I’d say not because this same guy lost his virginity to a guy only slightly older than he when he was in his early twenties. I also knew a kid who was about sixteen or seventeen who had an affair with someone about twelve or thirteen years older than he was. . Did this kid feel exploited? I don’t think so.
The point I’m getting at is that this society has a really, really difficult time dealing with gray areas. And we’re not really getting better either. We want to protect ourselves from each other so much that we’re not always willing to leave each other alone to experience life. At the same time is the uncomfortable reality that at fourteen we can get someone pregnant and get pregnant, and that’s a cold hard fact of biology. At fourteen you’re not a child, but you’re not an adult either. But most of us want sex at that age. If someone goes for a fourteen-year-old when he or she is twenty, or thirty, is that older person guilty of pedophilia as it’s traditionally known? Or is it that this particular fourteen-year-old may arguably be biologically ready for sex? How do we deal with this cold hard biological truth? If I as a fourteen-, fifteen- or sixteen-year-old was lucky to find someone older to seduce me, would I have been raped, or would I have consented? The law would’ve said I was too young to consent, but I’m not so sure, in reality, that this would’ve been true. And yet there are teenagers who are palpably unready for reality or sex. What age is a proper age of consent? If they’re not ready at, say, fourteen, at what age might they be ready? Some are never ready even at fifty. Some are ready and capable at fifteen, sixteen, seventeen. Are they ready at fourteen? How do we deal with reality?
Now, gentle readers, let me say that in no way am I advocating forcible rape. Kids can be raped and adults can be raped at any age. But now that I pose these questions, how many of you think I’m sick or disgusting or whatever for doing so? I’m not sure I’m worried about it because I’m already out and gay, and a lot of people may have issues with this; some of you on this board may even have issues with it, but oh well. Your thoughts?
When you get to about 12 years old, I think the law should take these on a case by case bases.
Also, I think some testing should be done to decide if you actually can consent.
Like in your case, I'd say, sure, because it was what you desired.
Some states have set the consent age at 14, so it just depends.
Like you, John, when I was 14 and 15.. (around that time,) I has so many fantasies about my older male teachers, some of them in their late 40's or early 50's. If one of them had noticed me and given me some special attention, I sure as hell wouldn't have felt abused. But this is getting away from the whole petaphilia aspect, so I don't want to cause this board to stray too far away from it's intended topic.
John, the technical definition of pedophilia doesn't include teenagers as the younger party.
It involves sex with prepubescent children. I do agree with you: we have lost the ability to
think critically on a case by case basis. When I was a teen, I fantasizes a lot about women
in their 20s.
But there is an additional problem: changing definitions. Now there are women who have
convoluted the term "rape" so far as to include cheating on your partner and not telling
her about it. Moving targets / randomly changing the meanings of words is a problem for
those of us who would do the Noble and honorable thing. And, it's awful when people
automatically put consensual gay relationships and pedophilia in the same group.
I found the article to be very interesting and very disturbing in about equal measure. I
also find it rather frustrating that those of you who wish to come out here and condemn
never have an alternative approach to a situation like this. Just because you don't like
something, doesn't mean it doesn't happen.
I think, or at least I hope, but all of us can agree that someone who chooses to abuse
children is the lowest of the low. This person however is trying to get help for themselves.
The question has already been asked on this board, what would you rather the guy do.
Nobody has come up with a sufficient answer.
Then we reach the grey area of sexual maturity. People mature at different speeds, no two
people are ever the same. Life is not black-and-white. I do believe once a person reaches
a certain age, if an alleged offence is supposed to have been committed, things need to be
looked at on a case-by-case basis. You cannot tar everybody with the same brush. You
also cannot say that just because someone is 14 and has had sex, that must be statutory
rape. This makes no sense whatsoever.
One other thing I should have added on my previous post. What is the point in someone
coming out here and deciding to comment on an article like this if they have not read it.
Because people decide what they think about a specific thing, so any titled discussion about it will get there opinion, or feelings about it posted.
Nothing is necessary to read, because this or that is X, and that is it! End of ciscussion.
They simply close the door on any views.
I commented on an issue, not the article itself. I commented because there are some cloudy issues here that this society is not dealing with, or dealing with very effectively. Right now, if you're fourteen, in much of this society, you're a child. That means by law, if you have sex with someone who is, say, 28, you're a rape victim. You weren't in reality raped because physically you were capable of sex, and you may have even come onto the 28-year-old, but you're a rape victim simply because of your age. So, my question is what's a child, and should we be looking at pedophilia and statutory rape with a more nuanced eye? That's why I commented on the issue while not commenting on the article. I think I delineated between the two and rather well, if I say so myself.
I'm not sure, but I don't think the not reading was directed at you. Could be wrong.
No post 44. The not reading part of my comment was not directed at you. I read what you
wrote previously. It was very well put actually.
K, cuz I just wanted to clarify wy I posted in case it was. Thanks for the clarification.
When you are sixteen, as the kid in the article is, you still have some childhood fantasies to overcome.
During the teen age years, a person is getting rid of childhood beliefs--like santa clause, or that your generation is going to be the smartest and best generation ever--obviously much wiser and better than your parents' generation.
I guess what I am saying is, it may be too early for him to decide that he is a pedaphile.
I also noticed that he was downloading child pornography. This might be the time for an authority figure in his life to take charge and put a stop to that crap. That's kind of like talking about not smoking with a cigarette in your hand.
But I think it is way too early to talk about chemical castration, or some of the other "solutions" posed in this forum.
Bob
At 15, I was sure of what I was. Even if an authority figure took the computer, and I'm not saying that be a bad thing, he'd still be exposed to kids, and these kids would bring up the feelings they would.
Wayne, I guess you were more realistic than me. At fifteen I was going to be president of the United States. I also thought I might be gay or asexual. Fortunately--or maybe not--none of this happened.
My point about restricting the kid's computer use is that somehow, in my opinion, he needs to learn self restraint until he can really know himself better.
Bob
But only experience can teach you self-restraint -- or not. And at fifteen, you know yourself as well as anybody at any age. Meaning you change. But the fifteen-year-old self and the fifty-year-old self might not necessarily get along very well with each other depending on how different the selves are. Neither one, I surmise, might know the other very well.
I tend to agree with Bob about the porn. I admit, my venture into that arena has been mainly a few stories. And primarily out of curiosity. I resisted the naturalist movement against porn because some of the radical feminists and others sounded an awful lot like religious people do on the subject. Big bad scary bogeymen coming to get you.
However, I've been reading on the various "brains" we have, the reptilian, mammalian and I believe neocortex. And basically we didn't evolve to handle some of this extreme stuff. I admit I have not read the 'extreme' stuff, mainly read about it. But apparently it can cause some people to behave in ways they otherwise wouldn't. I still have a problem with the moral panic / mania / shrill responses to it that you so often see. That, too, is extremely base of a response, in my opinion.
When I read the article, the scene describing the pornographic incident set off a perhaps reptilian, maybe mammalian, response in me, one of fight, flight, or freeze. I could not help that response. I could not help the gutache or the incessant need to take a shower, get some air, that sort of thing. This wasn't me saying 'eewwwy' 'yucky' like the moral mania people do. I can't credit my responses to anything noble. They're the type of responses that make you avoid dead rotting things. But what if the schematic of someone's mind is made up differently? And what if that incident would produce a totally different kind of response? My younger self certainly was quite different from my 40-something self. But I imagine the responses would have been similar if not the same as they were when I read it as a 40-something. Only I recently have begun to understand more of how the brain works, on an elementary level, so I'm guessing I would have been far more scared and confused by what happened. I guess I'm saying, based on my own strong precognitive reactions, someone else with a different brain schematic might have equally strong reactions of a different sort. Obviously one of our emergent properties is the ability to control ourselves. We haven't gone out and randomly killed priests and others that are associated now with pedophilia, even if we experienced strong waves of desire to do so after reading reports. The waves merely subside.
But if this is as strong as a sexual attraction, I don't think we know enough to cure it. Of course, I'm still pretty elementary in the area of psychology, and have only read a couple of books on memory and responses thus far.
And anyway, look what happens when we release them from prison? If they live in a community and then reoffend, peple feel guilty for not interfering, people feel betrayed by the fact that person was allowed to live there, the kids who were victimized feel betrayed by people in authority who put them in that situation, even if unwittingly. Clearly, we don't know how to manage this situation. Hence my support for humane termination, preferably self-termination of the offender. We simply don't know. I don't support vigilantes burning down their houses, throwing rocks at them, or other barbarous acts. But if they're terminated, they simply won't exist anymore, either to be tormenting others or perpetually self-tormented.
I remember Wesley Allan Dodd out here in Washington State. His attorney said that when he woke up, he was sickened by the crimes he'd done and the fantasies he had. After he threw up, then by noon he was already fantasizing again about doing it all over again. Ultimately he was hanged, his choice for method of execution. If he had had a humane way out sooner, before he committed any crimes, and it was socially accepted, perhaps there would have been no victims. He had ultimately waived his final appeals.
Maybe it has to do with upbringing and what is expected of you.
At 15 I understood self-restraint.
There were parental rules, and society rules I knew I had to deal with, and these rules sometimes caused me not to do things I wanted to do.
If I did them, I figured out how to do them and not have a parental or society problem.