This scholar, Tobias Hübinette, a doctoral student as Stockholm University, has written papers suggesting that Western men who are Asiaphiles, have Yellow Fever, etc. are actually pedophiles deep down inside. Or, as he puts it, "...what drives (Western man's) fetishism with Asian women is quite simply paedophile tendencies."
The usual PC morons are calling the poor guy a racist, and I haven't even the foggiest idea why.
He also says that the hip trend of Whites adopting East Asian kids is part of a long tradition of colonial oppression.
The university's legal department is investigating him and he may face charges of reverse racism, whatever the Hell that means. What does that mean, "face charges"?
I still don't understand why this guy's work is seen as racist, but to PC dolts, just about everything is. I guess the Sun is racist because it shines on those poor Third World countries so hard and makes them sweat and get tired and stuff.
All these years I've been romping around with Asian women, and it turns out I was really a serial child molester. I never realized that pedophilia could be so much fun.
Showing posts with label Pedophilia. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Pedophilia. Show all posts
Friday, November 14, 2008
Wednesday, September 03, 2008
POCD Versus Pedophilia - Differential Diagnosis
The latest death toll figures from Hurricane Katrina can be seen on this website here. The famous Russian neo-Nazi video is on this blog here.
Updated September 4. This is one of a number of posts I have written on mental illness. It deals with it from a diagnostic point of view that is probably most interesting to sufferers or clinicians, but may be interesting to some laypeople. I've been studying abnormal psychology for 30 years now, and experiencing it for 25 or so.
POCD is a subtype of OCD that is usually thought of as pure-O, or pure obsessional. Pure-O's do not have the usual behavioral rituals that the hand-washers, etc. have; instead, they have cognitive rituals. It is necessary that there be more documentation on this subtype of OCD because unfortunately, quite a few people are suffering from it, and clinicians barely understand it.
Due to this lack of understanding, clinicians think sufferers are psychotic or suffer from pedophilia. Many clinicians have a poor understanding of OCD as it is, and this series is intended to enlighten them about different forms that the illness can take.
I've written some stuff on POCD on this blog, and therefore, I get sufferers coming to me with the condition. As I don't have much issues with POCD these days, I'm capable of doing therapy with them online.
After talking to quite a few of them, it's clear that it's like any other type of OCD, since OCD sufferers, especially pure obsessionals, have a certain "sameness" about them such that you can nearly diagnose them on pure Gestalt alone.
I can tell pretty quickly after talking to someone whether they are suffering from OCD.
One thing to get clear on is that POCD will apparently never be acted on. I'm not aware of anyone acting on any of these obsessions.
There is another type of OCD called Harm OCD, and I have talked to a few of those folks too. Two of them were both convinced that they were serial killers. I quickly figured out that they had OCD and were completely harmless. People with harm OCD never do anything violent, and people with POCD never molest kids.
Once you know this, you can talk to them about all their scary thoughts with worries.
I might have a hard time doing therapy with an actual pedophile or a psychopath who really wanted to kill people. As a general rule though, these types do not feel there is anything wrong with them as they enjoy being this way, and they never seek help.
The usual POCD sufferer is a young man around college age or so. Females are much less common. I talked to one guy who was in his 30's. Sexual obsessions in general seem to hit young people the hardest of all for some reason. Most people with harm obsessions are also young people, mostly males, though I did talk to one 17 year old female.
OCD is a fear-based illness. It will latch onto anything in society that is frightening.
Nowadays, with Child Molester Mass Hysteria on the rampage and everyone worried about "pedos" and "predators", it's only logical that people with OCD would find this the perfect fear. What could be more terrifying than the fact that one may be a pedophile? Not much. Hence, POCD.
We have also seen a marked increase in fears of AIDS among OCD sufferers. AIDS is in our society, it's terrifying since if you get it, you're about dead, so OCD will latch onto it.
The best way we can do differential diagnosis here between POCD and pure pedophilia is to link to some websites.
First of all, a fellow I have been talking to has posted his history online here. He's given me permission to link to it. It's five pages, but if you read it, you should start to get a feel after a while about what this illness is all about.
Note the chronic doubting, the omnipresence of fear, the uncertainty about feelings and whether they are real or not, the questioning of everything from one's thoughts, feelings and history all the way to the actions and thoughts of others.
What's going on here is a hyperanalysis of the individual's history, thoughts and behaviors along with continuous checking of "scientific sources", followed by more rounds of unproductive doubting and worries. As you can see, nothing ever gets resolved here. The worries and doubts just go round and round. Once one gets settled, a new one comes up. This is truly a case of one's mind actually chasing its tail.
In this case, he is trying to prove whether or not he is a pedophile. He finds evidence, questions the evidence, checks, cross-checks and tests the evidence, then starts all over again.
There is atmosphere of wondering, uncertainty and doubting to the point where the person can start doubting his own perceptions. Thoughts and feelings can seem like they are actually occurring and the person becomes uncertain about what is really happening and what is just in their mind.
I talked to one woman who had lesbian fears during conversations with other women. I asked, "You get lesbian thoughts and this bothers you?" She said, "No, I worry that I'm going to say lesbian stuff to her. Then after the conversation is over, I wonder if I made lesbian comments to her." As we see, the person doubts their actual perceptions and wonders if things occurred that are did not even occur.
This doubting of one's own perceptions is actually quite common in this disorder and is almost diagnostic.
Unfortunately, it looks very strange, and clinicians often misdiagnose it as psychosis.
In this post, he says he can hear what people are thinking. That's a schizophrenic symptom, but when I questioned him about it, he said he just watched people very closely and thought he could figure out what they might be thinking, but he didn't really hear it with his ears. He admitted it wasn't really possible for him to know exactly what was in someone's thoughts.
When I heard that, I knew he did not have schizophrenia or a psychosis. Once again, though, we see internal thoughts and external perceptions being confused, common in OCD.
I wasn't impressed with the others in this thread, one of whom was accusing him of being a pedophile. An administrator, a clinical psychologist, finally gets it on page 4 and says he has sexual obsessions.
In this post, he says he is losing his attraction to women, and the attraction to kids seems to be increasing.
There is another sexual obsession called HOCD (homosexual OCD) that works much the same way. The person goes into horrible worries, thinking in a similar manner as this guy, that they may be gay or bisexual. In severe cases, they think that they are losing their attraction to the opposite sex and getting a new attraction to same sex. HOCD is very common; much more common than POCD.
As it's not possible to turn gay, bi or pedo against one's will, this is the common denominator in all sexual obsessions and is pathognomic.
Gay, bisexual and pedophilic persons do not feel as if alien forces are turning them into something they do not wish to be. They are what they are. The attraction, wanted or not, feels normal, natural, right, correct, real. They may worry about the way society will treat them, but it isn't a question of being transformed into something you are not.
He is also masturbating to pedophilic fantasies, but I'm not worried about that. He's doing this as some sort of checking behavior to "see if he's really a pedophile" or to "get it out of his system".
People with HOCD often do the same thing. They search out gay porn on the Internet and masturbate to it to "test their reaction". Then they go find some straight porn and masturbate to that to "test their reaction" to that. Then they endlessly compare reactions to try to figure out if they are gay or not. Typically, the testing never reveals any significant answers, so it just goes on and on.
This is called checking and it's also pathognomic of OCD.
The truth is that in males, sexuality is fixed by age 15. That means straight, gay, bi or whatever, can't change after that. What turns you on, turns you on. Behavior can change afterward, but not attraction. In females, it's different, but no female turns gay or bi against her will.
In one post, he tries to argue with the OCD by saying "I'm not a pedophile" (thought compulsion). His mind argues back, of course, by saying the opposite and telling him he is one. This is also pathognomic of OCD. OCD acts like a gremlin in your mind. It contradicts you and tells 4you stuff you don't even believe in and makes you confused.
The truth is, that's not really an internal dialogue, it's just OCD talking back and being contradictory. The result can be endless wars in the mind whereby one uses thought compulsions to try to contradict obsessions. For some strange reason, these don't seem to work very well, and the OCD often just fights back even harder with more intense contradictory statements.
Although masturbating to pedo fantasies may seem disturbing, I'm not worried about it in this case. Humans, especially young males, are polymorphously perverse, and can get turned on by just about anything.
A pedophile in general has a true preference for kids and does not have much interest in adults. They have been this way since early adolescence. It doesn't probably doesn't come on after age 15 or so, and neither do most other paraphilias. The root of all paraphilias, like the root of all sexual orientation, seems to be in the birthing storms of the teenage years.
My take is that OCD is lying to this guy. As you can see, he also has HOCD. He's suddenly developed gay fantasies. How? By looking at some gay porn on the Net. In his case, both pedo and gay fantasies were fantasy-supercharged due to their forbidden and taboo nature, not due to any real attraction.
OCD is lying to him, telling him he's gay and pedo and he's losing his attraction to women. HOCD sufferers also feel that they are losing their attraction to the opposite sex and gaining a new one to the same sex, but this is just an illusion. How this strange illness does this I'm not sure, but I think it has to do with the way anxiety and fear work on the brain.
HOCD sufferers are also typically young people and most are males, but there are quite a few young females too. They usually are shy introverts, like most OCD sufferers, and often have little sexual experience. The extroverted obsessional exists, but is quite rare. People seem to grow out of this gay OCD thing with age, or at least move onto other obsessions.
Since homosexuality is in our society and a popular meme in our culture and yet is not quite accepted, it's a logical fear for OCD to latch onto. For many young people, homosexuality is just wrong enough and taboo enough the fact that the thought that one might be gay or bi is quite terrifying.
If at some point, homosexuality and bisexuality become more accepted, OCD sufferers may stop worrying about being gay and start worrying about something else.
The nature of the OCD fears is not important. Depending on the era and society, OCD will latch onto whatever fears seem most terrifying for the time and place. The illness is mobile and once one fear is conquered, a new one can be acquired.
HOCD is a particularly horrible type of OCD. I've been to boards on the Net full of sufferers and many are seriously miserable, deeply depressed and contemplating suicide. For some reason, obsessionals, while often complaining of being suicidal, rarely seem to commit suicide. I think the fact that they are so fearful and inhibited keeps them from taking this final step.
For a glimpse of how real pedophiles think, and to tell the difference between POCD and pedophilia, check out this Wikisposure page that gives bios of numerous actual pedophiles that they are tracking. After you read through a number of the bios, you will get a common feel for what these guys are all about.
This, like all paraphilias, is not an anxiety disorder. The dominant emotion is not fear and doubt as in OCD. These guys aren't going round and round about whether or not they are pedophiles. That they are is clear as air to them.
Pedophilia, like all paraphilias, is an illness of desire, of appetite. It's like an addiction. They love it. This is what gets them off. They don't want to change, they don't want to get better, and the truth is they probably can't anyway.
I assume that true pedophilia, once fixed in adolescence and cemented in adulthood, is incurable. What gets you off, gets you off. It's not going to change. They can't help it, but at the same time, society needs to be protected.
Note: Readers should carefully read the Commenting Rules before commenting to avoid having their comments edited or deleted and to avoid being banned from the site.
Updated September 4. This is one of a number of posts I have written on mental illness. It deals with it from a diagnostic point of view that is probably most interesting to sufferers or clinicians, but may be interesting to some laypeople. I've been studying abnormal psychology for 30 years now, and experiencing it for 25 or so.
POCD is a subtype of OCD that is usually thought of as pure-O, or pure obsessional. Pure-O's do not have the usual behavioral rituals that the hand-washers, etc. have; instead, they have cognitive rituals. It is necessary that there be more documentation on this subtype of OCD because unfortunately, quite a few people are suffering from it, and clinicians barely understand it.
Due to this lack of understanding, clinicians think sufferers are psychotic or suffer from pedophilia. Many clinicians have a poor understanding of OCD as it is, and this series is intended to enlighten them about different forms that the illness can take.
I've written some stuff on POCD on this blog, and therefore, I get sufferers coming to me with the condition. As I don't have much issues with POCD these days, I'm capable of doing therapy with them online.
After talking to quite a few of them, it's clear that it's like any other type of OCD, since OCD sufferers, especially pure obsessionals, have a certain "sameness" about them such that you can nearly diagnose them on pure Gestalt alone.
I can tell pretty quickly after talking to someone whether they are suffering from OCD.
One thing to get clear on is that POCD will apparently never be acted on. I'm not aware of anyone acting on any of these obsessions.
There is another type of OCD called Harm OCD, and I have talked to a few of those folks too. Two of them were both convinced that they were serial killers. I quickly figured out that they had OCD and were completely harmless. People with harm OCD never do anything violent, and people with POCD never molest kids.
Once you know this, you can talk to them about all their scary thoughts with worries.
I might have a hard time doing therapy with an actual pedophile or a psychopath who really wanted to kill people. As a general rule though, these types do not feel there is anything wrong with them as they enjoy being this way, and they never seek help.
The usual POCD sufferer is a young man around college age or so. Females are much less common. I talked to one guy who was in his 30's. Sexual obsessions in general seem to hit young people the hardest of all for some reason. Most people with harm obsessions are also young people, mostly males, though I did talk to one 17 year old female.
OCD is a fear-based illness. It will latch onto anything in society that is frightening.
Nowadays, with Child Molester Mass Hysteria on the rampage and everyone worried about "pedos" and "predators", it's only logical that people with OCD would find this the perfect fear. What could be more terrifying than the fact that one may be a pedophile? Not much. Hence, POCD.
We have also seen a marked increase in fears of AIDS among OCD sufferers. AIDS is in our society, it's terrifying since if you get it, you're about dead, so OCD will latch onto it.
The best way we can do differential diagnosis here between POCD and pure pedophilia is to link to some websites.
First of all, a fellow I have been talking to has posted his history online here. He's given me permission to link to it. It's five pages, but if you read it, you should start to get a feel after a while about what this illness is all about.
Note the chronic doubting, the omnipresence of fear, the uncertainty about feelings and whether they are real or not, the questioning of everything from one's thoughts, feelings and history all the way to the actions and thoughts of others.
What's going on here is a hyperanalysis of the individual's history, thoughts and behaviors along with continuous checking of "scientific sources", followed by more rounds of unproductive doubting and worries. As you can see, nothing ever gets resolved here. The worries and doubts just go round and round. Once one gets settled, a new one comes up. This is truly a case of one's mind actually chasing its tail.
In this case, he is trying to prove whether or not he is a pedophile. He finds evidence, questions the evidence, checks, cross-checks and tests the evidence, then starts all over again.
There is atmosphere of wondering, uncertainty and doubting to the point where the person can start doubting his own perceptions. Thoughts and feelings can seem like they are actually occurring and the person becomes uncertain about what is really happening and what is just in their mind.
I talked to one woman who had lesbian fears during conversations with other women. I asked, "You get lesbian thoughts and this bothers you?" She said, "No, I worry that I'm going to say lesbian stuff to her. Then after the conversation is over, I wonder if I made lesbian comments to her." As we see, the person doubts their actual perceptions and wonders if things occurred that are did not even occur.
This doubting of one's own perceptions is actually quite common in this disorder and is almost diagnostic.
Unfortunately, it looks very strange, and clinicians often misdiagnose it as psychosis.
In this post, he says he can hear what people are thinking. That's a schizophrenic symptom, but when I questioned him about it, he said he just watched people very closely and thought he could figure out what they might be thinking, but he didn't really hear it with his ears. He admitted it wasn't really possible for him to know exactly what was in someone's thoughts.
When I heard that, I knew he did not have schizophrenia or a psychosis. Once again, though, we see internal thoughts and external perceptions being confused, common in OCD.
I wasn't impressed with the others in this thread, one of whom was accusing him of being a pedophile. An administrator, a clinical psychologist, finally gets it on page 4 and says he has sexual obsessions.
In this post, he says he is losing his attraction to women, and the attraction to kids seems to be increasing.
There is another sexual obsession called HOCD (homosexual OCD) that works much the same way. The person goes into horrible worries, thinking in a similar manner as this guy, that they may be gay or bisexual. In severe cases, they think that they are losing their attraction to the opposite sex and getting a new attraction to same sex. HOCD is very common; much more common than POCD.
As it's not possible to turn gay, bi or pedo against one's will, this is the common denominator in all sexual obsessions and is pathognomic.
Gay, bisexual and pedophilic persons do not feel as if alien forces are turning them into something they do not wish to be. They are what they are. The attraction, wanted or not, feels normal, natural, right, correct, real. They may worry about the way society will treat them, but it isn't a question of being transformed into something you are not.
He is also masturbating to pedophilic fantasies, but I'm not worried about that. He's doing this as some sort of checking behavior to "see if he's really a pedophile" or to "get it out of his system".
People with HOCD often do the same thing. They search out gay porn on the Internet and masturbate to it to "test their reaction". Then they go find some straight porn and masturbate to that to "test their reaction" to that. Then they endlessly compare reactions to try to figure out if they are gay or not. Typically, the testing never reveals any significant answers, so it just goes on and on.
This is called checking and it's also pathognomic of OCD.
The truth is that in males, sexuality is fixed by age 15. That means straight, gay, bi or whatever, can't change after that. What turns you on, turns you on. Behavior can change afterward, but not attraction. In females, it's different, but no female turns gay or bi against her will.
In one post, he tries to argue with the OCD by saying "I'm not a pedophile" (thought compulsion). His mind argues back, of course, by saying the opposite and telling him he is one. This is also pathognomic of OCD. OCD acts like a gremlin in your mind. It contradicts you and tells 4you stuff you don't even believe in and makes you confused.
The truth is, that's not really an internal dialogue, it's just OCD talking back and being contradictory. The result can be endless wars in the mind whereby one uses thought compulsions to try to contradict obsessions. For some strange reason, these don't seem to work very well, and the OCD often just fights back even harder with more intense contradictory statements.
Although masturbating to pedo fantasies may seem disturbing, I'm not worried about it in this case. Humans, especially young males, are polymorphously perverse, and can get turned on by just about anything.
A pedophile in general has a true preference for kids and does not have much interest in adults. They have been this way since early adolescence. It doesn't probably doesn't come on after age 15 or so, and neither do most other paraphilias. The root of all paraphilias, like the root of all sexual orientation, seems to be in the birthing storms of the teenage years.
My take is that OCD is lying to this guy. As you can see, he also has HOCD. He's suddenly developed gay fantasies. How? By looking at some gay porn on the Net. In his case, both pedo and gay fantasies were fantasy-supercharged due to their forbidden and taboo nature, not due to any real attraction.
OCD is lying to him, telling him he's gay and pedo and he's losing his attraction to women. HOCD sufferers also feel that they are losing their attraction to the opposite sex and gaining a new one to the same sex, but this is just an illusion. How this strange illness does this I'm not sure, but I think it has to do with the way anxiety and fear work on the brain.
HOCD sufferers are also typically young people and most are males, but there are quite a few young females too. They usually are shy introverts, like most OCD sufferers, and often have little sexual experience. The extroverted obsessional exists, but is quite rare. People seem to grow out of this gay OCD thing with age, or at least move onto other obsessions.
Since homosexuality is in our society and a popular meme in our culture and yet is not quite accepted, it's a logical fear for OCD to latch onto. For many young people, homosexuality is just wrong enough and taboo enough the fact that the thought that one might be gay or bi is quite terrifying.
If at some point, homosexuality and bisexuality become more accepted, OCD sufferers may stop worrying about being gay and start worrying about something else.
The nature of the OCD fears is not important. Depending on the era and society, OCD will latch onto whatever fears seem most terrifying for the time and place. The illness is mobile and once one fear is conquered, a new one can be acquired.
HOCD is a particularly horrible type of OCD. I've been to boards on the Net full of sufferers and many are seriously miserable, deeply depressed and contemplating suicide. For some reason, obsessionals, while often complaining of being suicidal, rarely seem to commit suicide. I think the fact that they are so fearful and inhibited keeps them from taking this final step.
For a glimpse of how real pedophiles think, and to tell the difference between POCD and pedophilia, check out this Wikisposure page that gives bios of numerous actual pedophiles that they are tracking. After you read through a number of the bios, you will get a common feel for what these guys are all about.
This, like all paraphilias, is not an anxiety disorder. The dominant emotion is not fear and doubt as in OCD. These guys aren't going round and round about whether or not they are pedophiles. That they are is clear as air to them.
Pedophilia, like all paraphilias, is an illness of desire, of appetite. It's like an addiction. They love it. This is what gets them off. They don't want to change, they don't want to get better, and the truth is they probably can't anyway.
I assume that true pedophilia, once fixed in adolescence and cemented in adulthood, is incurable. What gets you off, gets you off. It's not going to change. They can't help it, but at the same time, society needs to be protected.
Note: Readers should carefully read the Commenting Rules before commenting to avoid having their comments edited or deleted and to avoid being banned from the site.
Sex Offenders: Second Thoughts
The latest death toll figures from Hurricane Katrina can be seen on this website here. The famous Russian neo-Nazi video is on this blog here.
Updated September 4:
After I posted a couple of pieces on child molester mass hysteria, they got linked to some sex offender support groups and I got some comments. I started doing a lot more research, and I must say, I am not impressed with the sex offender support groups or their research. One of their favorite papers claims to show only 5% recidivism rate over 3 years or 10 years or 15 years or whatever, but apparently that's fraudulent.
One good study did find a 25% recidivism rate after 15 years. This is the same study that the RSO (registered sex offender) supporters quote as having a 5% relapse rate. At that's only for reoffenses.
While at Fresno State in the early 1990's, I did a ton of reading in journals. I liked the psychology journals a lot.
In one I found a study that used confidential interview procedures to determine the true rate of recidivism, because a lot of these guys reoffend and don't get caught.Anyway, these guys can admit to molesting kids online or in an interview, and there's usually nothing that can be done, since we don't know who the victim is, when the crime occurred, etc.
That study found a re-offense rate (not a re-arrest rate) for child molesters of 50% over 25 years. I think that's about right.
There's tremendous debate about what constitutes pedophilia, but this site, Wikisposure, ought to give you a pretty good idea. It's an anti-pedophile site set up the To Catch a Predator folks (Perverted Justice), and profiles lots of sex offenders, most of whom are out and out pedophiles. Looking through the profiles gives you a pretty good idea of what these guys are all about.
I'm even listed in the "articles to be done" category, which is either scary or hilarious, since I signed a petition calling for reform of these crazy laws. So anyone who wants to go there and say a bunch of evil stuff about me, just get yourself an account and log on.
According to the FBI, a large number, possibly a majority of cases, are not committed by opportunistic non-pedophilic molesters, but by males who are actually pedophilic in one way or another. To what degree, I'm not sure, but most of those profiled at ikisposure are obviously preferential molesters.
The sex offender propaganda says that 90% of molestations are just opportunistic crimes by non-pedophilic males. Apparently that's just not true.
However, all normal heterosexual adult males are maximally attracted to females aged 16, 17 and up into adulthood, so I strongly disagree with calling men who have sex with these girls pedophiles or even sex offenders. It's not called "pedophilia"; it's called "fucking a teenage girl".
All males also have very high, though not maximal attraction to girls aged 14 and 15, so that's not really abnormal or pedophilia either. Once you get into girls aged 13 and below, no adult of any age should be messing with them, period. They're just too young, and at some point, it is out and out child molesting. However, I do not think that persons under age 18 having sex with a 13 year old is abnormal.
Main thing about pedophiles, if you look at Wikisposure, is that it's obvious that the vast majority really don't have much interest in adults. A few do, but those are the minority. What turns em on is kids, and they usually have a preferential AoA, or age of attraction. It's usually phrased something like, "My AoA is 6-11."
A few of these guys are completely out and well-known in the community. Some have admitted to molesting kids and just got away with it. That's not enough to arrest or convict someone. A number of the older ones are roaming around the world. Mexico seems to be a favorite place. Boylovers do seem to dramatically outnumber the girllovers, despite the gay rights protestations.
I'm very sympathetic to teens going down for consensual sex and to young men aged 18-21 going down for sex with girls 14-17. The Romeo and Juliet cases are the most tragic of all. I'm also sympathetic to guys aged 21-29 going down sex with girls aged 15-17. The latter is surely illegal, and you're a fool if you do it, but whatever it is, it's not pedophilia.
I would prefer to see the age of consent lowered to 15 for both sexes.
For 14 year olds, sex with 14-21 year olds should be legal. Adults having sex with those 13 and under would be a crime. For 13 year olds, sex with 13-17 yr olds should be legal. These are Romeo and Juliet cases.
I'm primarily opposed to the conflation of this sort of sex with actual pedophilia and child molesting.
I also find the whole Child Molester Mass Hysteria thing very alarming. People are being accused of being child molesters merely because others regard them as odd or eccentric, for trying to make pleasant conversation with teenage girls, even when they have jobs that require them to interface with the public, or for ogling older attractive teenage girls.
These people have not been convicted or accused of any sex crimes whatsoever, and these are the most tragic cases of all. It's normal to try to talk to anyone who has a job interfacing with the public. All normal males are attracted to pretty 16-17 year old females. In this way, utterly normal behavior is insanely conflated with "child molesting" by an insane, puritanical, man-hating public.
Teens trading naked pics of themselves on videophones are going down on child porn trafficking charges. 15 year old girls take crotch shots of their pussies and send them to 18 year old males, and the guy goes down on child porn charges. How bout the girl? One thing I noticed about all this stuff above. It's always the boy who goes down, never the little teenage slut running to the cops. Some justice.
Nor do I think pics of naked 14-17 yr old girls, having sex or not, is the same thing as "child porn". I imagine your average male would like to look at something like that. But please, if any of you guys out there have any such pics on your computer, get rid of them. Society has gone insane about this stuff these days.
I still think that the residence and lifestyle restrictions for these guys is absurd. Screw a 15 year old girl and you can never be in any place where "children" are present! That means Starbucks. That means the supermarket. That means anywhere. What a bunch of police state bullshit.
GMAB.
I think Perverted Justice, which puts real adults behind fake profiles of mostly 13-15 year old girls, is silly. Most of these guys aren't "pedophiles" anyway. Jerry Lee Lewis married his 13 year old cousin when he was in his 20's.
They arrange a meeting with the guy, the guy shows up and he gets busted, and he never even bopped any girl, and there was no girl anyway. The guy gets 3-16 years (WTH?) in prison. Entrapment anyone? Guys, don't talk sex to teenage girls on the Net. Don't go meet them for sex. There are traps everywhere.
But I'm not particularly sympathetic to guys who committed what I consider actual sex offenses. You guys messed up and a lot of you have got a problem. You need to get it under control, quit blaming the victims, and try hard to make sure you don't do that again. Yeah, it's a witch hunt, but there's also a bunch of twisted idiots out there we need to watch, and a bunch of others who fucked up bad and need to clean up or else.
Note: Readers should carefully read the Commenting Rules before commenting to avoid having their comments edited or deleted and to avoid being banned from the site.
Updated September 4:
After I posted a couple of pieces on child molester mass hysteria, they got linked to some sex offender support groups and I got some comments. I started doing a lot more research, and I must say, I am not impressed with the sex offender support groups or their research. One of their favorite papers claims to show only 5% recidivism rate over 3 years or 10 years or 15 years or whatever, but apparently that's fraudulent.
One good study did find a 25% recidivism rate after 15 years. This is the same study that the RSO (registered sex offender) supporters quote as having a 5% relapse rate. At that's only for reoffenses.
While at Fresno State in the early 1990's, I did a ton of reading in journals. I liked the psychology journals a lot.
In one I found a study that used confidential interview procedures to determine the true rate of recidivism, because a lot of these guys reoffend and don't get caught.Anyway, these guys can admit to molesting kids online or in an interview, and there's usually nothing that can be done, since we don't know who the victim is, when the crime occurred, etc.
That study found a re-offense rate (not a re-arrest rate) for child molesters of 50% over 25 years. I think that's about right.
There's tremendous debate about what constitutes pedophilia, but this site, Wikisposure, ought to give you a pretty good idea. It's an anti-pedophile site set up the To Catch a Predator folks (Perverted Justice), and profiles lots of sex offenders, most of whom are out and out pedophiles. Looking through the profiles gives you a pretty good idea of what these guys are all about.
I'm even listed in the "articles to be done" category, which is either scary or hilarious, since I signed a petition calling for reform of these crazy laws. So anyone who wants to go there and say a bunch of evil stuff about me, just get yourself an account and log on.
According to the FBI, a large number, possibly a majority of cases, are not committed by opportunistic non-pedophilic molesters, but by males who are actually pedophilic in one way or another. To what degree, I'm not sure, but most of those profiled at ikisposure are obviously preferential molesters.
The sex offender propaganda says that 90% of molestations are just opportunistic crimes by non-pedophilic males. Apparently that's just not true.
However, all normal heterosexual adult males are maximally attracted to females aged 16, 17 and up into adulthood, so I strongly disagree with calling men who have sex with these girls pedophiles or even sex offenders. It's not called "pedophilia"; it's called "fucking a teenage girl".
All males also have very high, though not maximal attraction to girls aged 14 and 15, so that's not really abnormal or pedophilia either. Once you get into girls aged 13 and below, no adult of any age should be messing with them, period. They're just too young, and at some point, it is out and out child molesting. However, I do not think that persons under age 18 having sex with a 13 year old is abnormal.
Main thing about pedophiles, if you look at Wikisposure, is that it's obvious that the vast majority really don't have much interest in adults. A few do, but those are the minority. What turns em on is kids, and they usually have a preferential AoA, or age of attraction. It's usually phrased something like, "My AoA is 6-11."
A few of these guys are completely out and well-known in the community. Some have admitted to molesting kids and just got away with it. That's not enough to arrest or convict someone. A number of the older ones are roaming around the world. Mexico seems to be a favorite place. Boylovers do seem to dramatically outnumber the girllovers, despite the gay rights protestations.
I'm very sympathetic to teens going down for consensual sex and to young men aged 18-21 going down for sex with girls 14-17. The Romeo and Juliet cases are the most tragic of all. I'm also sympathetic to guys aged 21-29 going down sex with girls aged 15-17. The latter is surely illegal, and you're a fool if you do it, but whatever it is, it's not pedophilia.
I would prefer to see the age of consent lowered to 15 for both sexes.
For 14 year olds, sex with 14-21 year olds should be legal. Adults having sex with those 13 and under would be a crime. For 13 year olds, sex with 13-17 yr olds should be legal. These are Romeo and Juliet cases.
I'm primarily opposed to the conflation of this sort of sex with actual pedophilia and child molesting.
I also find the whole Child Molester Mass Hysteria thing very alarming. People are being accused of being child molesters merely because others regard them as odd or eccentric, for trying to make pleasant conversation with teenage girls, even when they have jobs that require them to interface with the public, or for ogling older attractive teenage girls.
These people have not been convicted or accused of any sex crimes whatsoever, and these are the most tragic cases of all. It's normal to try to talk to anyone who has a job interfacing with the public. All normal males are attracted to pretty 16-17 year old females. In this way, utterly normal behavior is insanely conflated with "child molesting" by an insane, puritanical, man-hating public.
Teens trading naked pics of themselves on videophones are going down on child porn trafficking charges. 15 year old girls take crotch shots of their pussies and send them to 18 year old males, and the guy goes down on child porn charges. How bout the girl? One thing I noticed about all this stuff above. It's always the boy who goes down, never the little teenage slut running to the cops. Some justice.
Nor do I think pics of naked 14-17 yr old girls, having sex or not, is the same thing as "child porn". I imagine your average male would like to look at something like that. But please, if any of you guys out there have any such pics on your computer, get rid of them. Society has gone insane about this stuff these days.
I still think that the residence and lifestyle restrictions for these guys is absurd. Screw a 15 year old girl and you can never be in any place where "children" are present! That means Starbucks. That means the supermarket. That means anywhere. What a bunch of police state bullshit.
GMAB.
I think Perverted Justice, which puts real adults behind fake profiles of mostly 13-15 year old girls, is silly. Most of these guys aren't "pedophiles" anyway. Jerry Lee Lewis married his 13 year old cousin when he was in his 20's.
They arrange a meeting with the guy, the guy shows up and he gets busted, and he never even bopped any girl, and there was no girl anyway. The guy gets 3-16 years (WTH?) in prison. Entrapment anyone? Guys, don't talk sex to teenage girls on the Net. Don't go meet them for sex. There are traps everywhere.
But I'm not particularly sympathetic to guys who committed what I consider actual sex offenses. You guys messed up and a lot of you have got a problem. You need to get it under control, quit blaming the victims, and try hard to make sure you don't do that again. Yeah, it's a witch hunt, but there's also a bunch of twisted idiots out there we need to watch, and a bunch of others who fucked up bad and need to clean up or else.
Note: Readers should carefully read the Commenting Rules before commenting to avoid having their comments edited or deleted and to avoid being banned from the site.
Monday, September 01, 2008
Could I Be a Criminal?
The latest death toll figures from Hurricane Katrina can be seen on this website here. The famous Russian neo-Nazi video is on this blog here.
Updated September 2:
I have very little in the way of a criminal record, and I'm 50 years old. In addition to not having a record, I did little to nothing in the way of serious crime and not getting caught, and what was done was ages ago anyway.
First of all, it is essential to note that with some crimes, it is almost impossible to start doing them at a late age. Strange, isn't it? Serious cops who stayed awake in Criminology class, especially detectives, know all this stuff, but your average citizen is a moron.
Let's start off with everyone's favorite: child molesting! Yeehaw!
I'm 50 years old and I'm going to say I've never molested any kids. I'll admit to what I call statutory rape, but that was very long ago. If you want to call that pedophilia, cool, then I guess I'm a pedo. No worries.
The whole idea of sex with a little kid strikes me as weird and bizarre for my tastes, but being polymorphously perverse, I guess I could how a guy could get into it, but then I can understand the mindset behind all sorts of evil and messed up stuff.
At age 50 and with no history, I'm probably unlikely to start off doing something like that with no history, but I guess there are exceptions.
I'm surely not a pedophile. Pedophiles are only interested in kids, and don't get turned on by adults, and you can't "catch it" in late life (it always starts in adolescence).
It's true that a number of guys like me (White, upper middle class background, advanced degrees) are going down on child pornography possession. I know what that stuff is, and whether I've seen it or not is irrelevant, as a lot of us old Internet hounds have seen just about every evil thing on the Net.
Point is, I know what it is, have frankly no interest whatsoever in it, know how to find it (it takes a very long time of searching specifically for it, probably days) but have no interest in the hassle, and don't worry about "accidentally stumbling on it".
I think a lot of these guys are into for the forbidden fruit aspect. They like it the same way people like beheading videos. Sure, some are pedos, but I don't think most are.
And there are varying types of "pedophiles" anyway. The two types to be most concerned about are preferential and exclusive. These are almost always males, and it's been there since adolescence. The preferential one prefers kids, but he can get off without them. The exclusive one can only get off with a kid. Some of these guys will marry a child-like woman and get her to dress up like a little girl to have sex.
It's clear to me that Michael Jackson and John Mark Carr are this type of individual, and I also suspect Woody Allen.
The other type is optional, and it's by far the most common. These guys have normal sexual interests and are mostly attracted to mature males or females, but they can also get turned on pedo stuff too, though they can take it or leave it. I think that the term "pedophile" is wrongly used in such cases, and John Douglas, FBI expert on such things, does not use it.
Guys with my profile are also going down for screwing teenage girls or getting them to pose naked. While I understand the impulse, I certainly try to make sure I don't act it. I don't get any offers anyway, so there's not much temptation to deny. As I get older, your average teenage girl seems sillier and sillier, and I'm not even sure if I would do it if it were legal.
Considering that older guys are now getting 10-20 years and similar insane sentences for bopping 15-17 year old girls, you guys really need to watch it out there. I'm serious!
One thing I can't become at my age is a serial killer. You don't just wake up at age 50 or whatever and decide to become a serial killer. For one thing, I'm getting kind of old, and serial killers need to be young and strong to subdue their victims with sheer physical force.
If I was a serial killer, I would have started a long time ago and would still be running around killing people, never having been caught. I'm going to deny that, but you suspicious types are certainly welcome to your paranoid fantasies about me.
I can't be a voyeur, an exhibitionist or a frottuerist either, because I believe that those start young. You don't just wake up at age 50 and start creeping onto people's property and peering into ladies' windows. Nor do you start running around with a trench coat flashing girls or hang out on subways jacking off in public. Nor do you start rubbing against women and girls nonconsensually in crowded public places.
I'll admit to engaging in frotteurism with a total stranger on an overnight bus trip once, but it was definitely consensual, and it was lots of fun. We never even discussed it, we just did it.
The next question is could I become a rapist. Apparently there are some folks around here who already think I am one. That's ok, but I'm going to deny it. I'm going to cop to what some might call date rape, but I just refer to it as "seduction". You're welcome to differ.
Rape is a young man's crime. For one thing, you have to be strong to overpower the woman, and that is indeed what you have to do most of the time. Furthermore, young men have a very high sex drive, and rape is in part a crime of sex, not violence, no matter what the feminists say.
If I were to be a rapist, I probably would have started a long time ago. Any guy my age still raping probably started young. Further, men with my profile simply do not rape. They might commit date rape, but even that is more likely when younger.
How about robbery? Males with my profile and with no history of robbery don't simply take it up at age 50. Also, robbery is definitely a young man's crime.
How about burglary? I must admit that this sounds like a pretty fun crime, but I've never done it before. If I could have burglarized an evil business or someone I hated, I might have been up for it. Burglary is another young man's crime. Anyone still burglarizing at my age is a drug addict.
How about embezzlement, fraud, etc? Yes, males at my age with my profile do quite a bit of this sort of thing. It's not violent, and you can steal a Hell of a lot more with a pen than with a gun anyway, and it often requires some brains or a degree to get into a place where you can even try to do something like this.
How about domestic violence? Men at my age with my profile commit little domestic violence. They do sometimes kill their wives, but at a much lower rate than other ages or different profiles. As I'm not married, there's no wife around to kill, so it's rather irrelevant at the moment.
Could I go nuts with a gun and commit a mass murder? I suppose I could, and guys my age do such things, but most of them don't have my particular profile (multiple degrees, advanced degrees). They are often depressed, deeply depressed. They're also very hostile, and I'm not very hostile, nor am I near as hostile as I ought to be.
Usually they are working at a fairly low level occupation, and I'm not working at any occupation. I don't have any guns anyway, and as they scare the crap out of me, I have no intention to get one. I suppose I could go nuts with a butcher knife or a club, but that wouldn't be too successful, and I'd be subdued pretty quickly.
I don't even have fantasies about doing something so antisocial, so I'm not worried, though 20-25 years ago in LA, I admit I used to have fantasies of throwing hand grenades at the teeming, incoherent, 3rd World-like United Nations crowds moving ant-like along the sidewalks, usually when stuck in traffic. I didn't have any grenades, so it wasn't a public safety issue.
So, tragically, it looks like the odds are that I don't have much of a criminal future. I'll have to be stuck with a life of law-abiding quiet desperation.
Note: Readers should carefully read the Commenting Rules before commenting to avoid having their comments edited or deleted and to avoid being banned from the site.
Updated September 2:
I have very little in the way of a criminal record, and I'm 50 years old. In addition to not having a record, I did little to nothing in the way of serious crime and not getting caught, and what was done was ages ago anyway.
First of all, it is essential to note that with some crimes, it is almost impossible to start doing them at a late age. Strange, isn't it? Serious cops who stayed awake in Criminology class, especially detectives, know all this stuff, but your average citizen is a moron.
Let's start off with everyone's favorite: child molesting! Yeehaw!
I'm 50 years old and I'm going to say I've never molested any kids. I'll admit to what I call statutory rape, but that was very long ago. If you want to call that pedophilia, cool, then I guess I'm a pedo. No worries.
The whole idea of sex with a little kid strikes me as weird and bizarre for my tastes, but being polymorphously perverse, I guess I could how a guy could get into it, but then I can understand the mindset behind all sorts of evil and messed up stuff.
At age 50 and with no history, I'm probably unlikely to start off doing something like that with no history, but I guess there are exceptions.
I'm surely not a pedophile. Pedophiles are only interested in kids, and don't get turned on by adults, and you can't "catch it" in late life (it always starts in adolescence).
It's true that a number of guys like me (White, upper middle class background, advanced degrees) are going down on child pornography possession. I know what that stuff is, and whether I've seen it or not is irrelevant, as a lot of us old Internet hounds have seen just about every evil thing on the Net.
Point is, I know what it is, have frankly no interest whatsoever in it, know how to find it (it takes a very long time of searching specifically for it, probably days) but have no interest in the hassle, and don't worry about "accidentally stumbling on it".
I think a lot of these guys are into for the forbidden fruit aspect. They like it the same way people like beheading videos. Sure, some are pedos, but I don't think most are.
And there are varying types of "pedophiles" anyway. The two types to be most concerned about are preferential and exclusive. These are almost always males, and it's been there since adolescence. The preferential one prefers kids, but he can get off without them. The exclusive one can only get off with a kid. Some of these guys will marry a child-like woman and get her to dress up like a little girl to have sex.
It's clear to me that Michael Jackson and John Mark Carr are this type of individual, and I also suspect Woody Allen.
The other type is optional, and it's by far the most common. These guys have normal sexual interests and are mostly attracted to mature males or females, but they can also get turned on pedo stuff too, though they can take it or leave it. I think that the term "pedophile" is wrongly used in such cases, and John Douglas, FBI expert on such things, does not use it.
Guys with my profile are also going down for screwing teenage girls or getting them to pose naked. While I understand the impulse, I certainly try to make sure I don't act it. I don't get any offers anyway, so there's not much temptation to deny. As I get older, your average teenage girl seems sillier and sillier, and I'm not even sure if I would do it if it were legal.
Considering that older guys are now getting 10-20 years and similar insane sentences for bopping 15-17 year old girls, you guys really need to watch it out there. I'm serious!
One thing I can't become at my age is a serial killer. You don't just wake up at age 50 or whatever and decide to become a serial killer. For one thing, I'm getting kind of old, and serial killers need to be young and strong to subdue their victims with sheer physical force.
If I was a serial killer, I would have started a long time ago and would still be running around killing people, never having been caught. I'm going to deny that, but you suspicious types are certainly welcome to your paranoid fantasies about me.
I can't be a voyeur, an exhibitionist or a frottuerist either, because I believe that those start young. You don't just wake up at age 50 and start creeping onto people's property and peering into ladies' windows. Nor do you start running around with a trench coat flashing girls or hang out on subways jacking off in public. Nor do you start rubbing against women and girls nonconsensually in crowded public places.
I'll admit to engaging in frotteurism with a total stranger on an overnight bus trip once, but it was definitely consensual, and it was lots of fun. We never even discussed it, we just did it.
The next question is could I become a rapist. Apparently there are some folks around here who already think I am one. That's ok, but I'm going to deny it. I'm going to cop to what some might call date rape, but I just refer to it as "seduction". You're welcome to differ.
Rape is a young man's crime. For one thing, you have to be strong to overpower the woman, and that is indeed what you have to do most of the time. Furthermore, young men have a very high sex drive, and rape is in part a crime of sex, not violence, no matter what the feminists say.
If I were to be a rapist, I probably would have started a long time ago. Any guy my age still raping probably started young. Further, men with my profile simply do not rape. They might commit date rape, but even that is more likely when younger.
How about robbery? Males with my profile and with no history of robbery don't simply take it up at age 50. Also, robbery is definitely a young man's crime.
How about burglary? I must admit that this sounds like a pretty fun crime, but I've never done it before. If I could have burglarized an evil business or someone I hated, I might have been up for it. Burglary is another young man's crime. Anyone still burglarizing at my age is a drug addict.
How about embezzlement, fraud, etc? Yes, males at my age with my profile do quite a bit of this sort of thing. It's not violent, and you can steal a Hell of a lot more with a pen than with a gun anyway, and it often requires some brains or a degree to get into a place where you can even try to do something like this.
How about domestic violence? Men at my age with my profile commit little domestic violence. They do sometimes kill their wives, but at a much lower rate than other ages or different profiles. As I'm not married, there's no wife around to kill, so it's rather irrelevant at the moment.
Could I go nuts with a gun and commit a mass murder? I suppose I could, and guys my age do such things, but most of them don't have my particular profile (multiple degrees, advanced degrees). They are often depressed, deeply depressed. They're also very hostile, and I'm not very hostile, nor am I near as hostile as I ought to be.
Usually they are working at a fairly low level occupation, and I'm not working at any occupation. I don't have any guns anyway, and as they scare the crap out of me, I have no intention to get one. I suppose I could go nuts with a butcher knife or a club, but that wouldn't be too successful, and I'd be subdued pretty quickly.
I don't even have fantasies about doing something so antisocial, so I'm not worried, though 20-25 years ago in LA, I admit I used to have fantasies of throwing hand grenades at the teeming, incoherent, 3rd World-like United Nations crowds moving ant-like along the sidewalks, usually when stuck in traffic. I didn't have any grenades, so it wasn't a public safety issue.
So, tragically, it looks like the odds are that I don't have much of a criminal future. I'll have to be stuck with a life of law-abiding quiet desperation.
Note: Readers should carefully read the Commenting Rules before commenting to avoid having their comments edited or deleted and to avoid being banned from the site.
Sunday, August 31, 2008
Interesting Comments on Sex Offenders
The latest death toll figures from Hurricane Katrina can be seen on this website here. The famous Russian neo-Nazi video is on this blog here.
Updated September 2:
From the comments section on the Child Molester Mass Hysteria post, a commenter writes:
I'd be interested to see how these laws are endangering kids and doing more harm than good.
Surely life is often Hell for these sex offenders. And you can see here that these insane laws are being used against all sorts of 18-21 year old guys messing around with 15-17 year old girls. The guys are totally normal, and now their lives are fucked forever.
They're on Sex Offender Lists, it's hard to work anywhere, they go to jail and get threatened by other inmates as "pedos" (that's weird, I figured most prison inmates would gladly fuck a 16 year old girl if they could get away with it). They can hardly live anywhere and often have to move back home.
Their career dreams are shot, and the military won't take you (I guess fucking a 16 year old girl is evil, but actually killing human beings, albeit towelheads, is cool). Lots of guys are also going down due to lying little girls telling tall tales of fake molestations and teenage bitches screaming rape.
I thank God I'm not on one of those blasted lists! I have enough problems as it is; I couldn't imagine what Hell my life would be if I was on one of those things.
Note: Readers should carefully read the Commenting Rules before commenting to avoid having their comments edited or deleted and to avoid being banned from the site.
Updated September 2:
From the comments section on the Child Molester Mass Hysteria post, a commenter writes:
Incest and friends of the family make up approximately 98% of all sex offenses (I think they mean child molestation and not rape, but I'm not sure). There has been estimated that 60 million individuals in this country that has experienced child sexual abuse. 50%, 30 million will go on to abuse a child. This is the crux of the problem, and we are not addressing it.I don't really know what to say to any of this stuff. I don't have much personal interest in it.
Instead, law makers are creating laws that do more harm than good. For example:
The public registries: 98% of those come from the family and friends of the family. It is a fact, that once caught, 95% of them never repeat another sex crime. And that's without therapy.
The remaining 5% are hiding in the registries. Those who did not know their victims, the violent rapists and the repeat offender.
And, approximately, 95% of all new sex offenses are committed by individuals NOT on the registries. Is it no wonder, because law makers have totally ignored the fact that Incest and friends of the family are the crux of the problem. There are 30 million abusers out there and lawmakers have done nothing to address prevention through education.
By ignoring incest and friends of the family, law makers have created a greater risk to children and society. If we do not openly discuss it, do not propose any educational models to better inform ourselves and keep ourselves afflicted with guilt and shame which washes over all concerned, perpetrators, victims, and other family members alike, we all help shield and perpetuate the crime.
These sex offender laws are being passed without advice of the experts. They are knee-jerk regulatory reaction which is just another way of saying, additional punishment is justified. Congress and the Legislatures have ignored the experts in the field.
But when it comes to light bulbs, they clamor for expert testimony. There is something very fundamentally wrong with their approach when it comes to sex offender laws.
Randy Lopp, treatment subcommittee chairman of the Oklahoma Sex Offender Management Team said, ''Most people who know anything about this are frustrated. It is just not helpful -- the laws as they are now.
I think if the general public understood the research, they would be willing to back the legislators to change the laws to make more sense and to protect children, because the laws as they are written are not protecting children," he said. "They are doing more harm than good.''
US Department of Justice, 2003
• Sample size - 9,700 sex offenders
• Length of time - 3 years
• Re-offense trigger - reconviction (Doesn't mean a new sex crime)
• Results - 5.3% sexual offense. 3.3% child molestation.
Arizona, Department of Corrections, 2006
• Length of time - Ten years
• Sample size - 2,444 sex offenders
• Results - 3.2% returned for a new felony sex offense, 1.4% returned for a new felony case of child molestation
• Reoffense trigger - new conviction (Any conviction)
And there are many more studies and they have the same results. Low recidivism rates for first time sex offenses.
Law makers pass these laws as non-controversial. Without debate and there is nothing I can think of that is more controversial.
Constitutional rights are being side stepped and it has been said that when you deny the constitution to one, you deny it to everyone. Please, look at the real problem. Incest and friends of the family and Prevent through education. Do away with these draconian laws that protect no one but endangers every child.
I'd be interested to see how these laws are endangering kids and doing more harm than good.
Surely life is often Hell for these sex offenders. And you can see here that these insane laws are being used against all sorts of 18-21 year old guys messing around with 15-17 year old girls. The guys are totally normal, and now their lives are fucked forever.
They're on Sex Offender Lists, it's hard to work anywhere, they go to jail and get threatened by other inmates as "pedos" (that's weird, I figured most prison inmates would gladly fuck a 16 year old girl if they could get away with it). They can hardly live anywhere and often have to move back home.
Their career dreams are shot, and the military won't take you (I guess fucking a 16 year old girl is evil, but actually killing human beings, albeit towelheads, is cool). Lots of guys are also going down due to lying little girls telling tall tales of fake molestations and teenage bitches screaming rape.
I thank God I'm not on one of those blasted lists! I have enough problems as it is; I couldn't imagine what Hell my life would be if I was on one of those things.
Note: Readers should carefully read the Commenting Rules before commenting to avoid having their comments edited or deleted and to avoid being banned from the site.
Thursday, August 28, 2008
What Do The "Psychos" Look Like?
The latest death toll figures from Hurricane Katrina can be seen on this website here. The famous Russian neo-Nazi video is on this blog here.
Updated September 2:
As I mentioned in a previous post, for about 25 years now, I've been hearing people tell me that so and so is a child molester, so and so is a psycho, so and so is a pervert, so and so is a predator, so and so looks like a rapist, so and so is a serial killer, or looks like a serial killer. Or whatever.
I've been checking these guys out the best I can for decades now, and not one of them has turned up dangerous yet. Every one I met was just a harmless neurotic, except for a couple of gangbangers. The gangbangers weren't called psychos anyway, they were called "thugs".
I find this whole exercise bizarre. I really do want to know what the Hell a child molester looks like. People keep telling me that so and so looks like a child molester, but this makes no sense to me. Can someone tell me precisely what a child molester looks like?
Let me tell you geniuses something, all you clowns who think you can "spot the pedo". Tell you what, idiots. You can't. Not only that, you can't even "spot the dangerous person". I'd wager a lot of the folks everyone insists are such a menace are probably the most harmless people out there.
Take that notion, that you can "spot the pedo" or even "spot the dangerous people", into the office of anyone who really knows what they are doing, say, a clinical psychologist, and they will laugh you right out of the office.
Mental health professionals will inform you that there is no way to "spot the pedo" or "spot the psycho" based on appearances. Furthermore, you're going to get such a tidal wave of false positives that the whole exercise is absurd.
I can honestly say that I've never met anyone who "looked like a child molester". I've seen all sorts of guys who looked "weird" in one way or another, but I if I observe them for a while, I can usually figure out somewhat what's going on with them mentally.
There's weird-looking people everywhere in this world. I just give em the benefit of the doubt and move on. I don't equate weird with "psycho", "pedo", "serial killer", "rapist". The world's full of strange-looking people, but in most cases, they're harmless. Plus I can actually read people pretty well.
I did meet one guy who "looked like a child molester", but that was due to behavior, not appearance. I was teaching school at an elementary school in Compton in 1989 when I saw a guy parked in a van at lunch. He had long hair and an extremely strange, haunted look in his eyes.
And I swear to God I thought he was looking at the kids. It freaked me out so much that I got his license plate and called the cops. That's the only "pedo" I've ever spotted, and I don't even know if he was a pedo.
I'm even more mystified by what a rapist looks like. Way back in 1980, at age 22, I was coming out of a porn theater in downtown Long Beach very late at night, like 1 AM.
Yeah, I used to go watch the porns back in the day. So fuck me, Puritans and feminazis.
Well, this movie was kind of sick. The basic premise of it was rape. It consisted of I think a main character who wore gloves and a ski mask and I think he was going around raping women. I didn't really enjoy it. I think it was called "Obsession", but I'm not sure.
I was coming out of the theater to the parking lot and there was this young White guy, tough-looking, working class. He looked very, very angry. He was seething and looked like he was ready to kill. The energy was radiating off him like heat in a desert. He was wearing shorts and had a knife in a sheath on his waist. And he was coming out of a sick rape flick.
I don't know if he "looked like a rapist", but he didn't seem like a very psychologically healthy young man, and I worried about what he might do in the future.
Other than that, "looking like a rapist" means nothing to me. There are dangerous looking characters all over the place, especially in working class White neighborhoods, Black ghettos and Hispanic barrios. I figure 50% of the Hispanic immigrant males walking around my neighborhood look like they're capable of rape. Big deal.
I know one guy in the mountains who did time for rape of a child under age 14. He's an Indian and hangs out in the library drawing pictures. He's seriously anti-social and refuses to talk to anyone. He's lived up there for 16 years and he hasn't re-offended. I knew the guy for a long time before I found out about his offense. I don't think he "looks like a rapist". I just think he's an antisocial asshole, that's all.
Even more peculiar is the notion that someone "looks like a serial killer". Wow. What does a serial killer look like anyway?
I can honestly say that I have never met anyone who "looked like a serial killer", nor have I ever known any serial killers, nor have I ever known any killers period, and I wouldn't know what they look like anyway. Do they look dangerous? The world is full of dangerous looking men, mostly younger men. Do they all "look like serial killers"?
I knew one of the local guys on the Sex Offender list here in Madera. He was on there for molesting a child under the age of 14. I don't know the details. He's kind of a sleazy-looking Mexican immigrant guy, but that describes about 50% of the Mexican guys in my neighborhood.
He worked at the local market, and I never thought there was anything wrong with him. In fact, I thought I was weird and he was normal. I would go in the store and try to act more like the child molester and less like myself. Only later did I find the guy on the list.
I knew another guy who went down on a sex offender law. He lived in Oakhurst and he was in his mid-30's. He had really long hair - hippie type - and worked in a computer store. He was absolutely normal in every sense of the word. Once again, I thought he was normal and I was weird. I used to try to "act like the child molester" when I went there (before he went down on charges).
He went down for "child molesting" - what he did was he shacked up with, I think, a 15 year old girl. He went down for 4 years or so. Now, they'd give him 10 or even 20 years. Not good judgment on his part, but whatever. They also found "child pornography" on his computer. In our Modern Bullshit World, that could very well have been naked pics of his 15 year old girlfriend.
For example, this fire inspector just got 20 years in prison (!?) for getting local 15 year old girls to pose nude for him. That's called "production of child pornography". I don't call that "producing child pornography"; I call it "getting a teenage girl to pose naked and snapping pics".
Incredibly, the judge says he's a "pedophile" and he will have to go on the stupid Sex Offender list for the rest of his life. I don't call this guy a "pedophile" for taking pictures of naked 15 and 16 year old girls. That's a perfectly healthy and normal desire for a male of any age. I do think that he broke the law and was stupid and careless.
Whether this stuff should be illegal, I'm not sure, but it ain't worth no 20 years.
Studies show that all normal males have an extremely high, though not maximal, attraction for 14-15 year old girls. They have maximal attraction for 16 year old girls.
That is, they react as strongly to 16 year old girls as to females of any age 16+. The reaction to 15 year old girls is about 90% of maximum (still very high) and to 14 year old girls, it's about 80% of maximum (still quite high. So it's absolutely normal for males of any age to get really turned on by 14-16 year old girls. It's not "pedophilia" or any of that crap. It's just...normal.
Now, in our crazy modern world, guys over 24 at least need to be real careful about girls aged 14-16. Mess around with em, and you are likely to get pounded for 10 years, or even 20. So though your desires are normal, healthy, and certainly non-pedophiliac, it's best to control yourself and not give in to temptation.
The whole crazy idea that we can "spot the sickos" is complete nonsense, but people believe it anyway. But it's comforting. The notion that we can't spot the psychos makes the world a pretty terrifying place.
Note: Readers should carefully read the Commenting Rules before commenting to avoid having their comments edited or deleted and to avoid being banned from the site.
Updated September 2:
As I mentioned in a previous post, for about 25 years now, I've been hearing people tell me that so and so is a child molester, so and so is a psycho, so and so is a pervert, so and so is a predator, so and so looks like a rapist, so and so is a serial killer, or looks like a serial killer. Or whatever.
I've been checking these guys out the best I can for decades now, and not one of them has turned up dangerous yet. Every one I met was just a harmless neurotic, except for a couple of gangbangers. The gangbangers weren't called psychos anyway, they were called "thugs".
I find this whole exercise bizarre. I really do want to know what the Hell a child molester looks like. People keep telling me that so and so looks like a child molester, but this makes no sense to me. Can someone tell me precisely what a child molester looks like?
Let me tell you geniuses something, all you clowns who think you can "spot the pedo". Tell you what, idiots. You can't. Not only that, you can't even "spot the dangerous person". I'd wager a lot of the folks everyone insists are such a menace are probably the most harmless people out there.
Take that notion, that you can "spot the pedo" or even "spot the dangerous people", into the office of anyone who really knows what they are doing, say, a clinical psychologist, and they will laugh you right out of the office.
Mental health professionals will inform you that there is no way to "spot the pedo" or "spot the psycho" based on appearances. Furthermore, you're going to get such a tidal wave of false positives that the whole exercise is absurd.
I can honestly say that I've never met anyone who "looked like a child molester". I've seen all sorts of guys who looked "weird" in one way or another, but I if I observe them for a while, I can usually figure out somewhat what's going on with them mentally.
There's weird-looking people everywhere in this world. I just give em the benefit of the doubt and move on. I don't equate weird with "psycho", "pedo", "serial killer", "rapist". The world's full of strange-looking people, but in most cases, they're harmless. Plus I can actually read people pretty well.
I did meet one guy who "looked like a child molester", but that was due to behavior, not appearance. I was teaching school at an elementary school in Compton in 1989 when I saw a guy parked in a van at lunch. He had long hair and an extremely strange, haunted look in his eyes.
And I swear to God I thought he was looking at the kids. It freaked me out so much that I got his license plate and called the cops. That's the only "pedo" I've ever spotted, and I don't even know if he was a pedo.
I'm even more mystified by what a rapist looks like. Way back in 1980, at age 22, I was coming out of a porn theater in downtown Long Beach very late at night, like 1 AM.
Yeah, I used to go watch the porns back in the day. So fuck me, Puritans and feminazis.
Well, this movie was kind of sick. The basic premise of it was rape. It consisted of I think a main character who wore gloves and a ski mask and I think he was going around raping women. I didn't really enjoy it. I think it was called "Obsession", but I'm not sure.
I was coming out of the theater to the parking lot and there was this young White guy, tough-looking, working class. He looked very, very angry. He was seething and looked like he was ready to kill. The energy was radiating off him like heat in a desert. He was wearing shorts and had a knife in a sheath on his waist. And he was coming out of a sick rape flick.
I don't know if he "looked like a rapist", but he didn't seem like a very psychologically healthy young man, and I worried about what he might do in the future.
Other than that, "looking like a rapist" means nothing to me. There are dangerous looking characters all over the place, especially in working class White neighborhoods, Black ghettos and Hispanic barrios. I figure 50% of the Hispanic immigrant males walking around my neighborhood look like they're capable of rape. Big deal.
I know one guy in the mountains who did time for rape of a child under age 14. He's an Indian and hangs out in the library drawing pictures. He's seriously anti-social and refuses to talk to anyone. He's lived up there for 16 years and he hasn't re-offended. I knew the guy for a long time before I found out about his offense. I don't think he "looks like a rapist". I just think he's an antisocial asshole, that's all.
Even more peculiar is the notion that someone "looks like a serial killer". Wow. What does a serial killer look like anyway?
I can honestly say that I have never met anyone who "looked like a serial killer", nor have I ever known any serial killers, nor have I ever known any killers period, and I wouldn't know what they look like anyway. Do they look dangerous? The world is full of dangerous looking men, mostly younger men. Do they all "look like serial killers"?
I knew one of the local guys on the Sex Offender list here in Madera. He was on there for molesting a child under the age of 14. I don't know the details. He's kind of a sleazy-looking Mexican immigrant guy, but that describes about 50% of the Mexican guys in my neighborhood.
He worked at the local market, and I never thought there was anything wrong with him. In fact, I thought I was weird and he was normal. I would go in the store and try to act more like the child molester and less like myself. Only later did I find the guy on the list.
I knew another guy who went down on a sex offender law. He lived in Oakhurst and he was in his mid-30's. He had really long hair - hippie type - and worked in a computer store. He was absolutely normal in every sense of the word. Once again, I thought he was normal and I was weird. I used to try to "act like the child molester" when I went there (before he went down on charges).
He went down for "child molesting" - what he did was he shacked up with, I think, a 15 year old girl. He went down for 4 years or so. Now, they'd give him 10 or even 20 years. Not good judgment on his part, but whatever. They also found "child pornography" on his computer. In our Modern Bullshit World, that could very well have been naked pics of his 15 year old girlfriend.
For example, this fire inspector just got 20 years in prison (!?) for getting local 15 year old girls to pose nude for him. That's called "production of child pornography". I don't call that "producing child pornography"; I call it "getting a teenage girl to pose naked and snapping pics".
Incredibly, the judge says he's a "pedophile" and he will have to go on the stupid Sex Offender list for the rest of his life. I don't call this guy a "pedophile" for taking pictures of naked 15 and 16 year old girls. That's a perfectly healthy and normal desire for a male of any age. I do think that he broke the law and was stupid and careless.
Whether this stuff should be illegal, I'm not sure, but it ain't worth no 20 years.
Studies show that all normal males have an extremely high, though not maximal, attraction for 14-15 year old girls. They have maximal attraction for 16 year old girls.
That is, they react as strongly to 16 year old girls as to females of any age 16+. The reaction to 15 year old girls is about 90% of maximum (still very high) and to 14 year old girls, it's about 80% of maximum (still quite high. So it's absolutely normal for males of any age to get really turned on by 14-16 year old girls. It's not "pedophilia" or any of that crap. It's just...normal.
Now, in our crazy modern world, guys over 24 at least need to be real careful about girls aged 14-16. Mess around with em, and you are likely to get pounded for 10 years, or even 20. So though your desires are normal, healthy, and certainly non-pedophiliac, it's best to control yourself and not give in to temptation.
The whole crazy idea that we can "spot the sickos" is complete nonsense, but people believe it anyway. But it's comforting. The notion that we can't spot the psychos makes the world a pretty terrifying place.
Note: Readers should carefully read the Commenting Rules before commenting to avoid having their comments edited or deleted and to avoid being banned from the site.
Child Molester Mass Hysteria
The latest death toll figures from Hurricane Katrina can be seen on this website here. The famous Russian neo-Nazi video is on this blog here.
Updated September 2:
Due to the fallout from the Groene case (see previous posts), Steve Groene is pushing a One Strike Law in Washington State, where he now resides. I don't blame him, and a lot of crime victims lash out like this.
As you can see on the page explaining the law, the law is constructed so Joseph Duncan would never have been freed to kill Steve's ex-wife and two kids and rape his daughter. So the tragic past would never have occurred.
California's 3 Strikes Law was written by Mike Reynolds in such a way that the 2-bit thugs who killed his daughter (who merely had lengthy records for petty crime) would have been imprisoned and would have been able to kill his daughter.
In this way, surviving crime victims, or usually relatives of crime victims, are able to time travel. They can go back in time, and in their imaginations, wipe out the past.
The problem is that this is all an illusion.
Mike Reynolds' crazy 3 Strikes Law didn't bring back his daughter, and the guys who did it are going down bigtime anyway. Steve's One Strike Law won't bring back Dylan or Slade, or wipe out what was done to Shasta.
Sure, it might prevent it from happening to others, but to be completely frank, I don't think that's the purpose of these laws. The purpose of these laws is to enable their enraged and vengeful authors-relatives of victims to imaginarily go back in time and prevent the past from occurring by passing a new law in the future.
It's the stuff of science fiction. It's magical thinking, but magical thinking is not just for kids and crazies. Adults do it all the time too, especially traumatized adults. Like relatives of murder victims.
First of all, I will say that this law is not as nuts as I assumed it would be. Some of my friends know Steve, and they did not think he would write a law as stupid as California's 3 Strikes Law, especially since his own son has a record as a 2-bit petty criminal. I'm not even sure about Steve's own history, but my friends say he ran with a rough crowd.
The proposed One-Strike law says that anyone guilty of child molestation (wisely put at under 12) and anyone guilty of forcible rape through the use of violence needs to go away for life. Now, most people would sit back and cheer.
To the authors' credit, the law seems to exclude the "date rape" bullshit by requiring that the rape be forcible and violent. It also rules out the "statutory rape" bullshit by requiring ruling out sex with minors aged 12 and up.
So where does that leave us? With a bunch of pedos and rapists. So why is this not a good idea?
Because right here in Madera, we have 133 people on the sex offender list. In a city of 50,000. Fresno, a city of 440,000, probably has 1,000 people on the list. They're either all or almost all men.
Nationally, with the ever-expanding definitions of sex offenders, there are now 2 million people on sex offender lists! Surely they are almost all males.
This is starting to look less like a war on "sex offenders" and more like just a war on males.
Here in Madera, most of the guys on the list are guilty of rape, child molesting under the age of 14 or even rape of a child under the age of 14. That's probably 100 out of 133. You're going to throw all 100 of these guys away for life?
In Fresno, I bet 800 out of the 1000 are on for rape or molesting a child under the age of 14. You're going to throw 800 guys away for life?
How many of the 2 million on the sex offender lists nationwide would be covered under this One Strike Law? That's an interesting bit of research.
This law isn't going to work. Implemented nationally, it will easily result in life sentences for hundreds of thousands, and possibly over 1 million, people, almost all men. Even if it's a good idea, it's not doable.
Note: Readers should carefully read the Commenting Rules before commenting to avoid having their comments edited or deleted and to avoid being banned from the site.
Updated September 2:
Due to the fallout from the Groene case (see previous posts), Steve Groene is pushing a One Strike Law in Washington State, where he now resides. I don't blame him, and a lot of crime victims lash out like this.
As you can see on the page explaining the law, the law is constructed so Joseph Duncan would never have been freed to kill Steve's ex-wife and two kids and rape his daughter. So the tragic past would never have occurred.
California's 3 Strikes Law was written by Mike Reynolds in such a way that the 2-bit thugs who killed his daughter (who merely had lengthy records for petty crime) would have been imprisoned and would have been able to kill his daughter.
In this way, surviving crime victims, or usually relatives of crime victims, are able to time travel. They can go back in time, and in their imaginations, wipe out the past.
The problem is that this is all an illusion.
Mike Reynolds' crazy 3 Strikes Law didn't bring back his daughter, and the guys who did it are going down bigtime anyway. Steve's One Strike Law won't bring back Dylan or Slade, or wipe out what was done to Shasta.
Sure, it might prevent it from happening to others, but to be completely frank, I don't think that's the purpose of these laws. The purpose of these laws is to enable their enraged and vengeful authors-relatives of victims to imaginarily go back in time and prevent the past from occurring by passing a new law in the future.
It's the stuff of science fiction. It's magical thinking, but magical thinking is not just for kids and crazies. Adults do it all the time too, especially traumatized adults. Like relatives of murder victims.
First of all, I will say that this law is not as nuts as I assumed it would be. Some of my friends know Steve, and they did not think he would write a law as stupid as California's 3 Strikes Law, especially since his own son has a record as a 2-bit petty criminal. I'm not even sure about Steve's own history, but my friends say he ran with a rough crowd.
The proposed One-Strike law says that anyone guilty of child molestation (wisely put at under 12) and anyone guilty of forcible rape through the use of violence needs to go away for life. Now, most people would sit back and cheer.
To the authors' credit, the law seems to exclude the "date rape" bullshit by requiring that the rape be forcible and violent. It also rules out the "statutory rape" bullshit by requiring ruling out sex with minors aged 12 and up.
So where does that leave us? With a bunch of pedos and rapists. So why is this not a good idea?
Because right here in Madera, we have 133 people on the sex offender list. In a city of 50,000. Fresno, a city of 440,000, probably has 1,000 people on the list. They're either all or almost all men.
Nationally, with the ever-expanding definitions of sex offenders, there are now 2 million people on sex offender lists! Surely they are almost all males.
This is starting to look less like a war on "sex offenders" and more like just a war on males.
Here in Madera, most of the guys on the list are guilty of rape, child molesting under the age of 14 or even rape of a child under the age of 14. That's probably 100 out of 133. You're going to throw all 100 of these guys away for life?
In Fresno, I bet 800 out of the 1000 are on for rape or molesting a child under the age of 14. You're going to throw 800 guys away for life?
How many of the 2 million on the sex offender lists nationwide would be covered under this One Strike Law? That's an interesting bit of research.
This law isn't going to work. Implemented nationally, it will easily result in life sentences for hundreds of thousands, and possibly over 1 million, people, almost all men. Even if it's a good idea, it's not doable.
Note: Readers should carefully read the Commenting Rules before commenting to avoid having their comments edited or deleted and to avoid being banned from the site.
Saturday, July 19, 2008
Sexmaniacman Praises Sex Crimes
Sexmaniacman kept reading the news in the papers and on the Net, and could not believe his eyes anymore.
A US diplomat goes to Brazil and "molests" some "little girls" aged 14-17, which Sexmaniacman assumed is perfectly legal in Brazil. He comes back to the US and gets arrested on "pedophile" charges.
A gay man "molests" a 15-year-old gay "little boy" prostitute in the Philippines, comes home to the US, and is arrested and labeled "pedophile". His arrest is uncovered when he goes to work for a local politician and his career is shot.
A local US mayor with long hair and a beard like a ZZ Top musician "molests" a 15-year-old "little girl". He's sentenced to prison and reviled by a town who hopes he stays away for a long time.
Roman Polanski gives a 13-year-old girl a Quaalude long ago, "molests" her, flees the phony prosecution for the sanity of France, where he remains to this day.
Mark Foley does little more than talk dirty to some "little boy" pages aged 16-17 (some of whom apparently enjoyed it), never touches any of them even once, and is labeled "pedophile".
In the UK, a father takes pictures of his kids on a slide in the park and insane irate mothers order him to stop taking pictures, and when he refuses, they go to the cops. Obviously he's a child molester. Whoops. He's just a father taking pics of his own kids.
Sexmaniacman looks at all the "pedophiles" above and cheers them on, despite the hysteria, although he thinks Mark Foley was an idiot. Sexmaniacman figures that if these guys want to have sex with teenagers, that's their business. Sexmaniacman realizes it's illegal, and he hopes he won't do it himself, but he can't see it as a sin.
We're in the midst of madness. Child Molester Mass Hysteria, to be precise.
Sexmaniacman did lots of "molesting", and had lots of fun, back in the day. He was 18, 19 and 20, and the women and "little girls" never stopped coming. The females were all ages, but plenty were 14, 15, 16 and 17. He had sex with them all, and then he got up in the morning and did it some more. He's proud of it to this very day. Nowadays, he'd be a "pedophile" for doing that. Back in the day, it was just good times.
Sexmaniacman had some "pedophile" friends. One was 28 years old, had a 16-yr-old "little girl" girlfriend, and "molested" her regularly.
Sexmaniacman cheered his friend on for this dastardly "pedophile" episode.
Sexmaniacman had another friend, Killerdude. He was 29 years old, and they were over at Killerdude's Mom's house getting high as kites and laughing their asses off. Killerdude's little sister's 15-yr-old girlfriend walked out of the bedroom and out the front door, waving goodbye. Killerdude confided to Sexmaniacman that he had just had sex with that "little girl" the other day.
His sister had approached Killerdude, said her friend wanted to have sex with him, and would he do it? He obviously obliged. What else could he do but "molest" her, right?
Sexmaniacman approved, and cheered his "pedophile" friend on.
Sexmaniacman gave up on the young girls when he turned 21. After that, they needed to be 18. In dubious cases, he even asked for ID.
Sexmaniacman read a pdf on the Net about Costa Rica. There are all kinds of American men down there having all sorts of sex fun with girls and women. In Costa Rica, a girl is a woman at age 13.
So you could say that Costa Rica is just a nation of sex perverts and child molesting sick fucks, and the whole country needs to be arrested. The males all need prison or castration or preferably both, and the females all need lifetime therapy for "getting molested".
Sexmaniacman cheers on Costa Rica in their freedom of choice and thumbing their nose at Child Molester Mass Hysteria.
There are men down there, American men, the pdf said, older guys, and some are having sex with underage girls. It didn't really give ages, but the implication was they were 14-17 years old. The guys were also doing it with women. They were just screwing anything, like any real man does if he gets a chance. The Costa Ricans wouldn't do anything about it because they didn't think it was a crime.
Sexmaniacman cheered them on, all of them, the American men doing this, the Costa Ricans for shrugging their shoulders, and the girls for having a good time. He didn't think he would want to go to Costa Rica, or any foreign land, and do it himself, since teenage girls hardly interested him much anymore, but he didn't care if another guy did.
The idiots in the US government, egged on by the Child Molester Mass Hysteria sweeping the land, passed a weird and retarded law. Only women and pussy-whipped married men would ever pass such a bitchy law, but pass it did.
It bizarrely extended the purview of US law overseas! If an American man of any age goes to a foreign land and has sex with a girl or boy who is 17 years and 11 months old or younger, he goes down on US child molesting laws!
Although at first it would seem that US law should never extend to crimes committed in foreign lands, which are properly the purview of those foreign lands, Sexmaniacman realized that this happened for a reason.
Actual Western pedophiles were going to Philippines, Thailand and other places and having sex with really young kids, because it was more or less legal over there, and the locals didn't care. In order to put a stop to this, the US and Western Europe passed some laws to bust pedos when they went overseas to molest little kids.
Otherwise, Western pedos would run around the world seeking out 3rd World hellholes where no one cared about pedo stuff, and dollars shut up everyone. In order to put a stop to this, anti-pedo laws were passed in the West extending Western law to other nations.
Sexmaniacman thought long and hard about this, and finally decided that this was really weird and legally obtuse, but still unfortunately right and proper in the case of Westerners having sex with actual little kids, but not with teenagers.
One thing Sexmaniacman bemoaned with the coming of Child Molester Mass Hysteria was the extinction of statutory rape, a perfectly valid category, and its blurring with actual pedophilia with young kids. Child Molester Mass Hysteria came to America, and quickly, a 17-yr-old girl and a 9-yr-old girl were the same thing. They were both "children", and those of all ages who had sex fun with them were all sick evil pedo fucks.
Even teenage boys were going down on these sissy, bitchy pedo laws for the crime of proving their manliness by sticking it to their teenage girlfriends. It was as if Iraq or Iran had come to the USA. A 13-yr-old boy and his girl have some sex fun, videotape it on cell phones and pass it around. The boy, but not the girl, goes down on charges of distributing child pornography. Just as the feminazi bitches would have it.
The anti-pedo laws, the blurring of teenage sex fun with sick child sex, the idiot wind attacking virile teenage boys and young men - they were all part of the war American women and girls were waging on real American men and boys. The bitches' wormboy boyfriends, vaginized male allies and pussy-whipped husbands defending the chastity of teenage daughters - they were all behind this bullshit too.
Real American men and testosterone-charged American boys, the few that were left, should have stood up to this attack on manliness, but they were too scared of the pedo charge to speak up.
Millions of vaginized males and girlymen all over America stood up alongside their pants-wearing, hysterical girlfriends and wives, screeching defense of the fake honor of hymenless 17-yr-old girls all over our fair land.
There were some serious issues here. Sexmaniacman had to agree. What was to be done?
You couldn't exactly legalize sex between adults and teens all the way down to age 14 or so. Otherwise you would have guys 40 and 50 walking down the street in broad daylight with their 15-yr-old girlfriends in tow. Sexmaniacman decided that that would not do.
How's about we went back to the old days, Sexmaniacman suggested?
Two laws.
One called statutory rape, judiciously prosecuted against egregious cases of sex between men and girls and gay boys 14-17. Another, child molesting, for sex between adults and girls and boys under the age of 14.
Overseas, clearly there was a national interest in the West to stop pedos from heading to SE Asia to have sex with little kids. If the Thais won't stop it, doggone it, we will. Sexmaniacman nodded his approval.
But Sexmaniacman could see no national interest in busting a Western man of any age for messing with a teenage girl in some sweltering foreign land. That was beyond absurd.
Child porn. Sexmaniacman pondered the very phrase, and lately did so frequently, and he didn't even feel guilty. He loved to think about child porn, since it offered so many legal and philosophical quandaries.
Child porn! The phrase alone drove Americans to paroxysms of madness.
It actually posed a most difficult case, Sexmaniacman noted. To merely look at the stuff was a crime. Child porn was on the Net, and you could find it if you really, really tried. Could you stumble upon it? Highly dubious.
Sexmaniacman felt that in analogy, child porn seemed like the case of a book in a library. It sat on a special shelf called the Internet Shelf. The book was out there in plain view, but there were signs next to it saying DO NOT LOOK AT THIS BOOK! ILLEGAL! LOCAL ORDINANCE BLA BLA BLA! Now and again, some maniac thrillseeker would grab the book and sneak a glance at a few pages.
They would almost always be caught, and the police would haul them away. They would be bashed in the press and their communities as sickos for looking at a book in the library, and their careers and lives would be ruined.
Although this scenario seems absurd, Sexmaniacman realized that that's pretty much how it is with child porn. It's out there on the Net, but if you look at it, you're going to prison. It has to be just about one of the only things on Earth, Sexmaniacman noted, that, if you look at it, you go to prison. Think about it, real hard. Anything else illegal to steal a glance at? Anyone?
Sexmaniacman pondered the weird legal and philosophical arguments for why looking at something , say, child porn, or anything, really, should be illegal:
Child porn is the portrayal of a crime.
Therefore, when you look at it, you violate the kid's privacy. Ok, but the kid has no idea you looked at their pic. Sexmaniacman felt it was impossible to argue that by stealing a glance at their porn pic, you have psychically harmed this kid via telepathy.
Furthermore, Sexmaniacman pointed out that there are all sorts of videos out on the Net that depict crimes, sometimes homicides. You can even find them on this blog. Should those not be illegal too? After all, they portray a crime, no? Or should they be allowed because the victims are dead and can't be harmed anymore?
When you look at child porn, you create a market for it, and that makes producers abuse more kids.
Well, ok, Sexmaniacman nodded. But once again, the criminal appears to be the person who made the child porn, not some guy looking at a picture.
What about trafficking? Sexmaniacman agreed this was a tough one. Here things get more dicey. Now you are actually making money off kids getting molested. He noted that this is getting quite close to actual harm, but there are still some problems.
Sexmaniacman offered up the scenario of the stuff being traded back and forth by pedos for free. No profit is involved, but Sexmaniacman figured we can't really legalize it, can we? If we did, child porn trading sites would open up all over the web, and probably those who make the stuff would create more of it. Sexmaniacman felt that society had an interest in preventing that.
No matter that merely looking at the stuff constituted quite a bizarre sort of crime. Sexmaniacman offered up, "What if we acted logical and said it was legal to look at the stuff, but not to peddle it?" But then he noted that child porn sites would pop up all over the web, just for folks to "look at". Society clearly has an interest in preventing that.
As far as the Internet goes, Sexmaniacman felt that probably the present state of affairs is the best. Child porn is quite illegal, hence it is extremely difficult to find, although with enough effort and hours of searching by savvy Net users, it's surely out there. So child porn is rare and very hard to find. It's almost impossible to stumble upon it by accident. This is probably the way it ought to be, he agreed.
Sexmaniacman pointed out that if we allowed folks to look at it, websites would sprout up all over, and hundreds of thousands or millions of people would be looking at the stuff, just like they are feasting on all the other shock stuff out there. And that didn't seem right to Sexmaniacman.
Sexmaniacman bemoaned the fact that child porn, child molesting and statutory rape are subjects that are banned from polite conversation, and frankly all conversation, in today's Idiot America. The only talk allowed about these subjects is to rant about how we want to castrate the sick fucks who "molest". No problem ever got solved by not talking about it, or only talking stupid about it.
Just to piss people off and make them hate him more than they already did, Sexmaniacman deliberately brought up these subjects, especially in public, just to watch the freakouts and hard stares.
Despite the fact that hardly anyone was talking sensibly about this sick stuff but Sexmaniacman, he noted that these areas opened up a lot of interesting philosophical and legal dilemmas that do not have easy answers.
Note: Readers should carefully read the Commenting Rules before commenting to avoid having their comments edited or deleted and to avoid being banned from the site.
A US diplomat goes to Brazil and "molests" some "little girls" aged 14-17, which Sexmaniacman assumed is perfectly legal in Brazil. He comes back to the US and gets arrested on "pedophile" charges.
A gay man "molests" a 15-year-old gay "little boy" prostitute in the Philippines, comes home to the US, and is arrested and labeled "pedophile". His arrest is uncovered when he goes to work for a local politician and his career is shot.
A local US mayor with long hair and a beard like a ZZ Top musician "molests" a 15-year-old "little girl". He's sentenced to prison and reviled by a town who hopes he stays away for a long time.
Roman Polanski gives a 13-year-old girl a Quaalude long ago, "molests" her, flees the phony prosecution for the sanity of France, where he remains to this day.
Mark Foley does little more than talk dirty to some "little boy" pages aged 16-17 (some of whom apparently enjoyed it), never touches any of them even once, and is labeled "pedophile".
In the UK, a father takes pictures of his kids on a slide in the park and insane irate mothers order him to stop taking pictures, and when he refuses, they go to the cops. Obviously he's a child molester. Whoops. He's just a father taking pics of his own kids.
Sexmaniacman looks at all the "pedophiles" above and cheers them on, despite the hysteria, although he thinks Mark Foley was an idiot. Sexmaniacman figures that if these guys want to have sex with teenagers, that's their business. Sexmaniacman realizes it's illegal, and he hopes he won't do it himself, but he can't see it as a sin.
We're in the midst of madness. Child Molester Mass Hysteria, to be precise.
Sexmaniacman did lots of "molesting", and had lots of fun, back in the day. He was 18, 19 and 20, and the women and "little girls" never stopped coming. The females were all ages, but plenty were 14, 15, 16 and 17. He had sex with them all, and then he got up in the morning and did it some more. He's proud of it to this very day. Nowadays, he'd be a "pedophile" for doing that. Back in the day, it was just good times.
Sexmaniacman had some "pedophile" friends. One was 28 years old, had a 16-yr-old "little girl" girlfriend, and "molested" her regularly.
Sexmaniacman cheered his friend on for this dastardly "pedophile" episode.
Sexmaniacman had another friend, Killerdude. He was 29 years old, and they were over at Killerdude's Mom's house getting high as kites and laughing their asses off. Killerdude's little sister's 15-yr-old girlfriend walked out of the bedroom and out the front door, waving goodbye. Killerdude confided to Sexmaniacman that he had just had sex with that "little girl" the other day.
His sister had approached Killerdude, said her friend wanted to have sex with him, and would he do it? He obviously obliged. What else could he do but "molest" her, right?
Sexmaniacman approved, and cheered his "pedophile" friend on.
Sexmaniacman gave up on the young girls when he turned 21. After that, they needed to be 18. In dubious cases, he even asked for ID.
Sexmaniacman read a pdf on the Net about Costa Rica. There are all kinds of American men down there having all sorts of sex fun with girls and women. In Costa Rica, a girl is a woman at age 13.
So you could say that Costa Rica is just a nation of sex perverts and child molesting sick fucks, and the whole country needs to be arrested. The males all need prison or castration or preferably both, and the females all need lifetime therapy for "getting molested".
Sexmaniacman cheers on Costa Rica in their freedom of choice and thumbing their nose at Child Molester Mass Hysteria.
There are men down there, American men, the pdf said, older guys, and some are having sex with underage girls. It didn't really give ages, but the implication was they were 14-17 years old. The guys were also doing it with women. They were just screwing anything, like any real man does if he gets a chance. The Costa Ricans wouldn't do anything about it because they didn't think it was a crime.
Sexmaniacman cheered them on, all of them, the American men doing this, the Costa Ricans for shrugging their shoulders, and the girls for having a good time. He didn't think he would want to go to Costa Rica, or any foreign land, and do it himself, since teenage girls hardly interested him much anymore, but he didn't care if another guy did.
The idiots in the US government, egged on by the Child Molester Mass Hysteria sweeping the land, passed a weird and retarded law. Only women and pussy-whipped married men would ever pass such a bitchy law, but pass it did.
It bizarrely extended the purview of US law overseas! If an American man of any age goes to a foreign land and has sex with a girl or boy who is 17 years and 11 months old or younger, he goes down on US child molesting laws!
Although at first it would seem that US law should never extend to crimes committed in foreign lands, which are properly the purview of those foreign lands, Sexmaniacman realized that this happened for a reason.
Actual Western pedophiles were going to Philippines, Thailand and other places and having sex with really young kids, because it was more or less legal over there, and the locals didn't care. In order to put a stop to this, the US and Western Europe passed some laws to bust pedos when they went overseas to molest little kids.
Otherwise, Western pedos would run around the world seeking out 3rd World hellholes where no one cared about pedo stuff, and dollars shut up everyone. In order to put a stop to this, anti-pedo laws were passed in the West extending Western law to other nations.
Sexmaniacman thought long and hard about this, and finally decided that this was really weird and legally obtuse, but still unfortunately right and proper in the case of Westerners having sex with actual little kids, but not with teenagers.
One thing Sexmaniacman bemoaned with the coming of Child Molester Mass Hysteria was the extinction of statutory rape, a perfectly valid category, and its blurring with actual pedophilia with young kids. Child Molester Mass Hysteria came to America, and quickly, a 17-yr-old girl and a 9-yr-old girl were the same thing. They were both "children", and those of all ages who had sex fun with them were all sick evil pedo fucks.
Even teenage boys were going down on these sissy, bitchy pedo laws for the crime of proving their manliness by sticking it to their teenage girlfriends. It was as if Iraq or Iran had come to the USA. A 13-yr-old boy and his girl have some sex fun, videotape it on cell phones and pass it around. The boy, but not the girl, goes down on charges of distributing child pornography. Just as the feminazi bitches would have it.
The anti-pedo laws, the blurring of teenage sex fun with sick child sex, the idiot wind attacking virile teenage boys and young men - they were all part of the war American women and girls were waging on real American men and boys. The bitches' wormboy boyfriends, vaginized male allies and pussy-whipped husbands defending the chastity of teenage daughters - they were all behind this bullshit too.
Real American men and testosterone-charged American boys, the few that were left, should have stood up to this attack on manliness, but they were too scared of the pedo charge to speak up.
Millions of vaginized males and girlymen all over America stood up alongside their pants-wearing, hysterical girlfriends and wives, screeching defense of the fake honor of hymenless 17-yr-old girls all over our fair land.
There were some serious issues here. Sexmaniacman had to agree. What was to be done?
You couldn't exactly legalize sex between adults and teens all the way down to age 14 or so. Otherwise you would have guys 40 and 50 walking down the street in broad daylight with their 15-yr-old girlfriends in tow. Sexmaniacman decided that that would not do.
How's about we went back to the old days, Sexmaniacman suggested?
Two laws.
One called statutory rape, judiciously prosecuted against egregious cases of sex between men and girls and gay boys 14-17. Another, child molesting, for sex between adults and girls and boys under the age of 14.
Overseas, clearly there was a national interest in the West to stop pedos from heading to SE Asia to have sex with little kids. If the Thais won't stop it, doggone it, we will. Sexmaniacman nodded his approval.
But Sexmaniacman could see no national interest in busting a Western man of any age for messing with a teenage girl in some sweltering foreign land. That was beyond absurd.
Child porn. Sexmaniacman pondered the very phrase, and lately did so frequently, and he didn't even feel guilty. He loved to think about child porn, since it offered so many legal and philosophical quandaries.
Child porn! The phrase alone drove Americans to paroxysms of madness.
It actually posed a most difficult case, Sexmaniacman noted. To merely look at the stuff was a crime. Child porn was on the Net, and you could find it if you really, really tried. Could you stumble upon it? Highly dubious.
Sexmaniacman felt that in analogy, child porn seemed like the case of a book in a library. It sat on a special shelf called the Internet Shelf. The book was out there in plain view, but there were signs next to it saying DO NOT LOOK AT THIS BOOK! ILLEGAL! LOCAL ORDINANCE BLA BLA BLA! Now and again, some maniac thrillseeker would grab the book and sneak a glance at a few pages.
They would almost always be caught, and the police would haul them away. They would be bashed in the press and their communities as sickos for looking at a book in the library, and their careers and lives would be ruined.
Although this scenario seems absurd, Sexmaniacman realized that that's pretty much how it is with child porn. It's out there on the Net, but if you look at it, you're going to prison. It has to be just about one of the only things on Earth, Sexmaniacman noted, that, if you look at it, you go to prison. Think about it, real hard. Anything else illegal to steal a glance at? Anyone?
Sexmaniacman pondered the weird legal and philosophical arguments for why looking at something , say, child porn, or anything, really, should be illegal:
Child porn is the portrayal of a crime.
Therefore, when you look at it, you violate the kid's privacy. Ok, but the kid has no idea you looked at their pic. Sexmaniacman felt it was impossible to argue that by stealing a glance at their porn pic, you have psychically harmed this kid via telepathy.
Furthermore, Sexmaniacman pointed out that there are all sorts of videos out on the Net that depict crimes, sometimes homicides. You can even find them on this blog. Should those not be illegal too? After all, they portray a crime, no? Or should they be allowed because the victims are dead and can't be harmed anymore?
When you look at child porn, you create a market for it, and that makes producers abuse more kids.
Well, ok, Sexmaniacman nodded. But once again, the criminal appears to be the person who made the child porn, not some guy looking at a picture.
What about trafficking? Sexmaniacman agreed this was a tough one. Here things get more dicey. Now you are actually making money off kids getting molested. He noted that this is getting quite close to actual harm, but there are still some problems.
Sexmaniacman offered up the scenario of the stuff being traded back and forth by pedos for free. No profit is involved, but Sexmaniacman figured we can't really legalize it, can we? If we did, child porn trading sites would open up all over the web, and probably those who make the stuff would create more of it. Sexmaniacman felt that society had an interest in preventing that.
No matter that merely looking at the stuff constituted quite a bizarre sort of crime. Sexmaniacman offered up, "What if we acted logical and said it was legal to look at the stuff, but not to peddle it?" But then he noted that child porn sites would pop up all over the web, just for folks to "look at". Society clearly has an interest in preventing that.
As far as the Internet goes, Sexmaniacman felt that probably the present state of affairs is the best. Child porn is quite illegal, hence it is extremely difficult to find, although with enough effort and hours of searching by savvy Net users, it's surely out there. So child porn is rare and very hard to find. It's almost impossible to stumble upon it by accident. This is probably the way it ought to be, he agreed.
Sexmaniacman pointed out that if we allowed folks to look at it, websites would sprout up all over, and hundreds of thousands or millions of people would be looking at the stuff, just like they are feasting on all the other shock stuff out there. And that didn't seem right to Sexmaniacman.
Sexmaniacman bemoaned the fact that child porn, child molesting and statutory rape are subjects that are banned from polite conversation, and frankly all conversation, in today's Idiot America. The only talk allowed about these subjects is to rant about how we want to castrate the sick fucks who "molest". No problem ever got solved by not talking about it, or only talking stupid about it.
Just to piss people off and make them hate him more than they already did, Sexmaniacman deliberately brought up these subjects, especially in public, just to watch the freakouts and hard stares.
Despite the fact that hardly anyone was talking sensibly about this sick stuff but Sexmaniacman, he noted that these areas opened up a lot of interesting philosophical and legal dilemmas that do not have easy answers.
Note: Readers should carefully read the Commenting Rules before commenting to avoid having their comments edited or deleted and to avoid being banned from the site.
Wednesday, May 21, 2008
Kids Lie About Child Molestation
Due to the Child Molester Hysteria that has taken over our society in the past 10-15 years, an awful lot of lies are flying around about child molestation. This hysteria has arguably not helped kids one bit, has made an entire nation into an hysterical, witch-hunting bunch of crazies, and has possibly thrown a bunch of innocent men in jail or at least under suspicion on false charges of child abuse.
Malicious females now regularly make up child porn and child molesting charges against husbands they are divorcing. An older man who admits to being interested in teenage girls - science has shown us that this is an absolutely normal desire - is now accused of being a child molester or a pedophile.
First of all, it is quite impossible for a girl aged 15-17 to be "sexually abused" or "molested". She can have sex. If the man is a certain number of years older, this is a crime on his part called statutory. I am confident that in the overwhelming majority of cases, girls aged 15-17 who have sex with older men do so quite willingly and suffer absolutely no harm whatsoever from these encounters.
Second, it is said that kids almost never make up sex abuse allegations - the number of false allegations is said to be on the order of 2% or less. This is one of the most pernicious lies that feminists are peddling these days, and probably many completely innocent men have gone down on child molestation charges as a result of some kid's lies.
I know a 78-year-old male teacher who was accused of molesting a 13-yr-old Black girl (In the middle of class?!) when he tried to break up a fight between her and another girl. Yeah, he had to pull 'em apart. Nowadays, that's called "molesting"!
A good friend, a teacher, was accused by an entire classroom full of 10-yr-old girls of molesting them during class in full view of all the other students! Tell me how that is even possible?! The girls tried to break out of class one day and raided the door. He barred the door, because if he let them break out, he's in big trouble. 15 girls mobbed him and tried to get the door open. He had to fight them off by pushing them away.
He showed up the next day and there was a lynch mob atmosphere in the hall full of enraged parents. Every one of those little diabolical lying bitches had accused him of molesting them! They said he was grabbing their breasts as he pushed them away from the door. He said that the thought that they had breasts had never even occurred to him as he was pushing them away - in his opinion, they didn't even have breasts.
I assume that all of these little girls got tons of useless therapy for their hallucinated episode, and I bet some are "suffering" to this very day.
After these two episodes of kids lying about child molesting to get an adult male in trouble, if I am on a jury in a child molesting case, I will probably vote to acquit any male without priors who is accused of molestation, if the evidence is only some kid's accusation, unless there is some other evidence.
AFAICT, kids nowadays are just little lying machines when it comes to child molestation charges. I figure possibly up to 50% of the child molesting charges out there could be totally made up lies.
I do not mean to say that there are not cases of real child molestation.
Obviously, it is a serious problem, and new evidence seems to indicate that kids are often harmed by adults doing this to them, and that the harm may be long-term. But how can we possibly tell whether a kid is lying or not? Sure, maybe they are telling the truth, but maybe they are lying too.
So, if there is no other evidence against a man (eyewitness, forensic, confession, priors), why convict him strictly on the testimony of some little brat? I’m aware that this attitude may cause some really bad guys to go free, but the other way around seems to end up sentencing a lot of innocent guys on one of the worst charges you can go down on. It's not a pretty picture either way.
This post has been linked at the excellent Entitled to an Opinion blog.
Note: Readers should carefully read the Commenting Rules before commenting to avoid having their comments edited or deleted and to avoid being banned from the site.
Malicious females now regularly make up child porn and child molesting charges against husbands they are divorcing. An older man who admits to being interested in teenage girls - science has shown us that this is an absolutely normal desire - is now accused of being a child molester or a pedophile.
First of all, it is quite impossible for a girl aged 15-17 to be "sexually abused" or "molested". She can have sex. If the man is a certain number of years older, this is a crime on his part called statutory. I am confident that in the overwhelming majority of cases, girls aged 15-17 who have sex with older men do so quite willingly and suffer absolutely no harm whatsoever from these encounters.
Second, it is said that kids almost never make up sex abuse allegations - the number of false allegations is said to be on the order of 2% or less. This is one of the most pernicious lies that feminists are peddling these days, and probably many completely innocent men have gone down on child molestation charges as a result of some kid's lies.
I know a 78-year-old male teacher who was accused of molesting a 13-yr-old Black girl (In the middle of class?!) when he tried to break up a fight between her and another girl. Yeah, he had to pull 'em apart. Nowadays, that's called "molesting"!
A good friend, a teacher, was accused by an entire classroom full of 10-yr-old girls of molesting them during class in full view of all the other students! Tell me how that is even possible?! The girls tried to break out of class one day and raided the door. He barred the door, because if he let them break out, he's in big trouble. 15 girls mobbed him and tried to get the door open. He had to fight them off by pushing them away.
He showed up the next day and there was a lynch mob atmosphere in the hall full of enraged parents. Every one of those little diabolical lying bitches had accused him of molesting them! They said he was grabbing their breasts as he pushed them away from the door. He said that the thought that they had breasts had never even occurred to him as he was pushing them away - in his opinion, they didn't even have breasts.
I assume that all of these little girls got tons of useless therapy for their hallucinated episode, and I bet some are "suffering" to this very day.
After these two episodes of kids lying about child molesting to get an adult male in trouble, if I am on a jury in a child molesting case, I will probably vote to acquit any male without priors who is accused of molestation, if the evidence is only some kid's accusation, unless there is some other evidence.
AFAICT, kids nowadays are just little lying machines when it comes to child molestation charges. I figure possibly up to 50% of the child molesting charges out there could be totally made up lies.
I do not mean to say that there are not cases of real child molestation.
Obviously, it is a serious problem, and new evidence seems to indicate that kids are often harmed by adults doing this to them, and that the harm may be long-term. But how can we possibly tell whether a kid is lying or not? Sure, maybe they are telling the truth, but maybe they are lying too.
So, if there is no other evidence against a man (eyewitness, forensic, confession, priors), why convict him strictly on the testimony of some little brat? I’m aware that this attitude may cause some really bad guys to go free, but the other way around seems to end up sentencing a lot of innocent guys on one of the worst charges you can go down on. It's not a pretty picture either way.
This post has been linked at the excellent Entitled to an Opinion blog.
Note: Readers should carefully read the Commenting Rules before commenting to avoid having their comments edited or deleted and to avoid being banned from the site.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
