|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Hell: Internet Child Porn-Hundreds Arrested
|
Obnoxious Snob
Arch-Deacon
# 982
|
Posted
Well, now we know as if we didn't already. What does the net truly reveal to us-loads of interesting sights with heaps of information and discussions ? Travel tips? Weather forecasts? Chat Rooms full of fascinating individuals sharing their deepest and most philosophical of reflections? A true community of postmodern individuals?
Not a bit of it. What, seemingly, the net has revealed is to the extent to which the abuse of children and child pornography is the leisure activity of choice of hundreds of male, middle class professionals unknown to the police before now. Many, if not most, happily 'married', under the illusion that their discreet, private little suburban, respectable could safely hold such nasty, nasty, secrets.
Their cover has been blown, Thank God. I do hope, too, that all of us think a little more carefully as to who are truly perverted and how we identify them and a lot more carefully about notions about the 'Family' and Christian 'Morality'. It is behind the seemingly respectable that we often discover the truly demonic. ![[Mad]](angryfire.gif)
[ 10. March 2003, 00:45: Message edited by: Erin ]
--------------------
'The best thing we can do is to make wherever we're lost in Look as much like home as we can'
Christopher Fry
Posts: 889 | From: Kernow | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eanswyth
Ship's raven
# 3363
|
Posted
I agree, but am curious. Is this related to a news item of which I haven't heard?
Posts: 1323 | From: San Diego | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sarkycow
La belle Dame sans merci
# 1012
|
Posted
Arch-, please can you provide a link, if this is a news story to which you are referring? If it's a rant, then please indicate this. And possibly expand - posters round here just hate having to give half-baked opinions 2/5ths of a story ![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Viki, hellhost
--------------------
“Just because your voice reaches halfway around the world doesn't mean you are wiser than when it reached only to the end of the bar.”
Posts: 10787 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Obnoxious Snob
Arch-Deacon
# 982
|
Posted
Sorry, I assumed everyone would have heard the BBC News this evening. Literally hundreds of people which the Police specifically mentioned as middle class professionals without any previous connections have been arrested and tons and tons of downloaded material seized. In the Midlands I believe. Hilary Benn, the Home Office Minister, rolled out to comment on the fact that whereas the Police have loads of resources to target Street Crime, the Police feel overwhelmed and under-funded to deal with the level of Internet child porn they are discovering.
--------------------
'The best thing we can do is to make wherever we're lost in Look as much like home as we can'
Christopher Fry
Posts: 889 | From: Kernow | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arrietty
Ship's borrower
# 45
|
Posted
This might refer to the story in question.
On a cursory reading, it seems to be an appeal for more funds so the police can arrest numerous more paedophiles, rather than absolute proof they are 'out there'.
--------------------
i-church
Online Mission and Ministry
Posts: 6634 | From: Coventry, UK | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Obnoxious Snob
Arch-Deacon
# 982
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Arrietty:
This might refer to the story in question.
On a cursory reading, it seems to be an appeal for more funds so the police can arrest numerous more paedophiles, rather than absolute proof they are 'out there'.
Do you really doubt that they are 'out there' ?
--------------------
'The best thing we can do is to make wherever we're lost in Look as much like home as we can'
Christopher Fry
Posts: 889 | From: Kernow | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nicolemr
Shipmate
# 28
|
Posted
i kinda' liked this quote from that article:
quote:
Thomas Reedy, who ran the website and made millions from it, is now serving a sentence of 1,335 years.
1,335 years. think he'll make it to his release date? ![[Devil]](graemlins/devil.gif)
--------------------
On pilgrimage in the endless realms of Cyberia, currently traveling by ship. Now with live journal!
Posts: 11803 | From: New York City "The City Carries On" | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Duo Seraphim*
Sea lawyer
# 3251
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by nicolemrw:
i kinda' liked this quote from that article:
quote:
Thomas Reedy, who ran the website and made millions from it, is now serving a sentence of 1,335 years.
1,335 years. think he'll make it to his release date?
Hopefully and then he'll get what's coming to him.
In my former existence, I had to advise a company defending an unfair dismissal suit brought by an employee sacked for storing pornographic material on the company's servers and then forwarding it on to his friends. This latter act involved the company in potential liability under the Obscene Publications Act.
I had to wade through the entire list of URLs which this person had visited during work hours - a mix of naughty schoolgirl sites and sad streaming porn videos - in order to verify that they did indeed fall within the definition of porn and thus were a serious breach of the company's computer use policy justifying sacking. They were and it did - and the newly admitted male solicitor from my firm's Employment group who watched the whole process was both fascinated and repelled.
For my part, if I had ever an interest in porn I lost it somewhere around porn website number 184. The worst part was e-mailing the firm's national IT manager to warn him that I was about to commit multiple breaches of my firm's computer use policy in the name of fee-earning work.
--------------------
2^8, eight bits to a byte
Posts: 3967 | From: Sydney Australia | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arrietty
Ship's borrower
# 45
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Arch-:
Do you really doubt that they are 'out there' ?
I know a lot of paedophiles who are inside as I worked with them for over a year. And I know the frustration of those who deal with this issue day in and day out that once their sentences are done they will be out in the world to offend again and again.
I also know the frustration of doing child protection courses with lay ministers and ordinands who like to see the offenders as 'out there' and not potentially in their churches. Comments like 'well a lot of children make it up' and 'it may not be as abd as the parents say' and 'you have to remember you are a pastor to the offender as well' in response to a pretty typical case study made me despair.
However I still think that the actual story I found on the BBC website after I read your OP reads like an attempt by the police to shock the public into pressuring for more resources.
Nothing wrong with that but I hope it pressures a few church leaders, councils etc into believing the problem is not conveniently located 'out there' but may well be dear old Mr Z in the choir who some of the parents are a bit abrupt with for some reason they can't understand.
[Standard code problem. Folks, you really don't need two [quote] tags.]
[ 13. November 2002, 00:03: Message edited by: sarkycow ]
--------------------
i-church
Online Mission and Ministry
Posts: 6634 | From: Coventry, UK | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Basket Case
Shipmate
# 1812
|
Posted
Maybe this thread should go to Dead Horses right away, because i think this is a classic issue.
Here's why i think that:
There is a group of Christian psychologists on the radio, who (for my money) are the most insightful of any people i have ever been exposed to.
The 4 main ones are male, and one of the main foci of their ministry is what they call "Every Man's Battle", & of course, it's about pornography.
I don't hear any secular counselors who even see this as an issue worth addressing. Many see porn as almost a healthy alternative (I guess to repression, marital "actual" cheating, rape or abuse or whatever).
My respect for these men just went through the roof, to hear them speaking a truth which is so foreign to the modern mythology.
I am actually the opposite of a prude, & many people defend porn in the name of anti-prudery. I think porn is actually just another symptom of widespread immaturity and alienation from flesh-and-blood people - Yes, women most definitely have the problem, too - it's addictive.
Posts: 1157 | From: Pomo (basket) country | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chorister
Completely Frocked
# 473
|
Posted
I do think it is all really awful. However, I do just wonder whether every one of these men in the Midlands (and in other areas which haven't been investigated yet) really are all paedophiles, or are some curious to have a look at what is readily available? My guess is that they are rather naive, probably not the sort to have actively sought out such material in the past, but not being intelligent (or thinking) enough to realise that by their very curiosity they are feeding the situation as it provides an incentive for the real abusers to abuse even more children to provide the material. This applies whether it is teenage girls or boys and young children.
I suppose the cut-off point is whether they have downloaded loads of material. The idle curiosity user would just log on and look up the sites, whereas the committed members would download and pay for material. I suggest the police concentrate on the worst offenders and hope this scares off the petty dabblers from doing so in the future.
--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.
Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nanny Ogg
Ship's cushion
# 1176
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
I do think it is all really awful. However, I do just wonder whether every one of these men in the Midlands (and in other areas which haven't been investigated yet) really are all paedophiles, or are some curious to have a look at what is readily available?
I would rather them be investigated than allow paedohiles to slip through the net because some do gooder thinks that they were just being "curious".
quote:
I suppose the cut-off point is whether they have downloaded loads of material. The idle curiosity user would just log on and look up the sites, whereas the committed members would download and pay for material.
Many paedophiles just look rather than download because in paying for the material they leave themselves open to being caught.
Also, what type of material do you class as child porn? Paedophiles collect any photos of children which may fuel their fantasies. This may include nude or sexual pictures, but can easily be of children in swimwear, school uniform or even normal clothes. Where do you draw the line?
quote:
I suggest the police concentrate on the worst offenders and hope this scares off the petty dabblers from doing so in the future.
The problem is in differentiating between the petty dabblers and serious offenders. What may appear on the surface as insignificant browsing may well hide a deeper problem.
--------------------
Buy me a beer and I'm you friend forever
Posts: 4137 | From: Away with the fairies | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Xavierite
Shipmate
# 2575
|
Posted
Chorister,
The story seems to suggest that all those arrested have been traced through credit card details. That doesn't suggest someone stupidly satisfying their curiosity to me.
Posts: 2307 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chorister
Completely Frocked
# 473
|
Posted
I am mostly inclined to agree with you all. Probably part of me just doesn't want to accept that so many people are involved in this. As a mother, the thought is very scary.
I still believe though that there is a question of degree - there are some people in it much deeper than others. Hopefully the people who are not in it very deep yet will stop, but those who already are need to be identified and caught quickly - very hard when, as already seen in the Soham case, some of the culprits are also police officers.
--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.
Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Assistant Village Idiot
Shipmate
# 3266
|
Posted
I used to work on a sexual offenders unit, and have some familiarity with the literature, but would not present myself as any authority. I do have a bit to add.
Of course wolves hide in sheep's clothing. It doesn't do any good to hide in wolf's clothing, does it? Remember this before being shocked at the church members and scout leaders you hear about. We are a magnet for molesters.
I am very discouraged about all attempts at treatment of this population. Cure, I think, is out of the question. Ongoing treatment has some small success, but almost always with the milder offenders. There are broad categories of offenders, but the treatment for each is only a bit different. A sincere desire to get better, as manifested by actually inconveniencing oneself, is rare. When DSO's say they want treatment but refuse accountability, I am reminded of Jesus's statement about plucking out an eye. These guys won't even pluck out an eyebrow.
--------------------
formerly Logician
Posts: 885 | From: New Hampshire, US | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Willyburger
Ship's barber
# 658
|
Posted
locigian,
As one who once worked with the victims of pedophiles, your post saddens me deeply. Where is room for the forgiveness that Christ preached when the little ones continue to be at risk?
--------------------
Willy, Unix Bigot, Esq.
--
Why is it that every time I go out to buy bookshelves, I come home with more books?
Posts: 835 | From: Arizona, US | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Garden Hermit
Shipmate
# 109
|
Posted
Every single one of us has weaknesses.
My temptations are other women even though I'm happily married. Its something I have to work hard to avoid, particularly as I often come into contact with divorced women who I know are desperate for a man or anyone to hug them.
These men who have found child porn on the internet probably would never have thought of it before.
They probably wouldn't be seen dead in a 'Sex Shop' and probably wouldn't have ever thought of even touching a child.
Now they have found their weakness, they have moved very much further into dangerous ground.
Maybe all that is needed is for the Police to inform them that they 'know about' their internet activities.
Sending them to prison is not a solution.
However I agree these sites are dangerous and if possible they need jamming or shutting down.
Similarly there are sites which encourage gambling and tell people how to grow and use cannabis.
All humans are naturally curious and its curiousity, they say, that killed the cat.
The Chinese don't like the internet because it harbours dangerous new political thoughts.
Muslim states don't like it because the Christian Bible is now freely available.
The first sin in The Bible was that of curiousity and to eat of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.
It seems that that is a very good description of the Internet.
Posts: 1413 | From: Reading UK | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Garden Hermit
Shipmate
# 109
|
Posted
Just a further comment.
It is exceptionally easy to get someone's credit card details from a discarded slip etc which gives expiry date, name and number.
You can even make them up based on your own cards.
Then someone types them in on an Internet Porn Site (maybe even your own children) and lo and behold, a few months later the Police arrest you for child pornography.
Moral. Always check your credit card statements very, very carefully because Porn Sites Company Names are not always easily recognisable.
Posts: 1413 | From: Reading UK | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Obnoxious Snob
Arch-Deacon
# 982
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Garden Hermit:
Every single one of us has weaknesses.
These men who have found child porn on the internet probably would never have thought of it before.
They probably wouldn't be seen dead in a 'Sex Shop' and probably wouldn't have ever thought of even touching a child.
Similarly there are sites which encourage gambling and tell people how to grow and use cannabis.
All humans are naturally curious and its curiousity, they say, that killed the cat.
To compare the deliberate and systematic downloading of child pornography with sites for growing cannabis or defending the practice as just part of natural human curiosity is unbeleivably stupid and crass. Each image of a child is a child who is being abused and psychologically destroyed. People who download such images are child abusers. Police have found not one or two images but thousands on each computer-men who through the internet contact other men with similar 'tastes'. Many begin to plan together the production of their own 'libraries' of images, begin, in other words, to continue the cycle of abuse with other children, sometimes even their own.
If your understanding of these men is that they are just naturally curious, just as you are naturally curious about other women, then, frankly, I really do not know what to say.
{Crass UBB code and double post sorted out.}
[ 14. November 2002, 09:05: Message edited by: Nightlamp ]
--------------------
'The best thing we can do is to make wherever we're lost in Look as much like home as we can'
Christopher Fry
Posts: 889 | From: Kernow | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Garden Hermit
Shipmate
# 109
|
Posted
Child abuse was a joke 20 years ago, 'Carry On' type films always making fun of 'funny' Scout Masters or Vicars. But it was funny because everyone knew what the joke alluded to and that there was a great deal of truth in it. I can't remember anyone speaking out about 'child abuse' then so everyone is tarred with the brush of acceptance.
But I can assure you that 'hugging' a married woman or taking cannabis can lead to just as much pain as child abuse.
If you disagree maybe we should draw a hierarchy of sins ? eg Murder 10, Rape/Child Abuse 9, Knee Capping/Adultery 8, Stabbing/Wounding 7, Buglary 6, Phone Mugging 5, Graffiti 3 etc.
Posts: 1413 | From: Reading UK | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chorister
Completely Frocked
# 473
|
Posted
I can see what GH is trying to say, but I do believe that any crime against a child is worse than a similar crime against an adult. It is all to do with power. There may be many adults who don't have equality of power and you may wish to include mentally handicapped (or whatever the PC term for this is now) within your definition, but there is no way that a child could have the same chance of resisting the attack as an adult could.
--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.
Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
eleighteen
Shipmate
# 2736
|
Posted
Gosh, it's just like Salem. Most of these people are completely harmless. Today's secular culture of serial step-parenting and failure to administer discpipline causes far more harm to "the kiddies" than looking at pictures.
I'd expect Christians to show a little more intelligence and compassion.
--------------------
The disbelieving husband is sanctified through the wife (I Cor 7.14)........(thinks)..... woo-hooo!
Posts: 52 | From: overboard | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
ChrisT
One of the Good Guys™
# 62
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by eleighteen:
Most of these people are completely harmless.
I don't have the words to respond to this, incredulous is the nearest I can get. But I know others will.
--------------------
Firmly on dry land
Posts: 6489 | From: Here, there and everywhere | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ariel
Shipmate
# 58
|
Posted
> But I can assure you that 'hugging' a married woman or taking cannabis can lead to just as much pain as child abuse.
I really wonder what planet some of my shipmates live on sometimes. Committing adultery with an adult who invites your advances can in no way be compared to child abuse. A child is half your size. They are not physically or emotionally equipped to cope with what an adult may do to them. They may end up with internal injuries, they may end up terrified of strangers, and as a young adult unable to form worthwhile relationships for years. Are you seriously equating that with adultery?
> Gosh, it's just like Salem. Most of these people are completely harmless.
I don't care what anyone says, it is not normal to find children sexually attractive, and even looking at pictures of small children shows in my view some kind of unpleasant kink in their sexuality. Anyone who downloads hundreds of these pictures is not an innocent.
Posts: 25445 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Astro
Shipmate
# 84
|
Posted
Back in the 1970's an ex-policeman told me that in some parts of London incest was the 2nd most common crime - ususlly parent-child.
This kind of thing has always been going on, but as fewer and fewer activities become considered to be wrong there are less targets for those who want to appear morally superior to others to attack.
That's not to say that in the past sexual exploitation of children was more acceptable just that it was not singled out so much.
Desire for sex with a child is evil and virtually uncureable, but we should not get so obsessed about it that children get imprisioned at home (for their own protection of course)
--------------------
if you look around the world today – whether you're an atheist or a believer – and think that the greatest problem facing us is other people's theologies, you are yourself part of the problem. - Andrew Brown (The Guardian)
Posts: 2723 | From: Chiltern Hills | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
eleighteen
Shipmate
# 2736
|
Posted
Let's just subtly change that last post:
quote:
I don't care what anyone says, it is not normal to find other men sexually attractive, and even looking at pictures of other men shows in my view some kind of unpleasant kink in their sexuality. Anyone who downloads hundreds of these pictures is not an innocent.
Do you think closet homosexuals should be round up, impisoned or left to the fury of the mob? No?
See a flaw in your argument...
Wait, since this is a Christian talkboard, lets change that quote again:
quote:
I don't care what anyone says, it is not normal to find women other than your wife sexually attractive, and even looking at pictures of other women shows in my view some kind of unpleasant kink in their sexuality. Anyone who downloads hundreds of these pictures is not an innocent.
We're all guily Ariel
--------------------
The disbelieving husband is sanctified through the wife (I Cor 7.14)........(thinks)..... woo-hooo!
Posts: 52 | From: overboard | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Xavierite
Shipmate
# 2575
|
Posted
Eleighteen,
If you're determined to troll, at least be subtle about it. Your attempts on this thread are particularly feeble.
![[Disappointed]](graemlins/disappointed.gif)
Posts: 2307 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
eleighteen
Shipmate
# 2736
|
Posted
Actually Astro, child abuse is most commonly carried out by step-parents. Were it that the Church were so indignant of the damage wrecked by the permissive society...
Step"fathers" (i.e. this month's live-in-lover) in underclass homes are a far more real threat to children than a respectable chap, who releases the frustration of his desires with a guilty hand-shandy over some dodgy pics.
--------------------
The disbelieving husband is sanctified through the wife (I Cor 7.14)........(thinks)..... woo-hooo!
Posts: 52 | From: overboard | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Garden Hermit
Shipmate
# 109
|
Posted
Back in my school days (1962) we had a school master who abused several boys (aged around 12/13). He was found out, dismissed, prosecuted and given a prison sentence of 6 months.
Nowadays he might be lucky to get 10 years. However doesn't this then make such a person want to 'get rid of the victim' ?
Children need protecting (by being made aware) and these adults (who usually have been abused themselves in the vicious cycle) need treatment.
In this witch hunt (yes it really is Salem) we have organisations which appear to want to protect children but publish the graphic details of abuse which are possibly designed to 'titillate', and IMO may well be encouraging the very abuse they porport to want to stop.
Let's remember than 90% of child abuse is within the family by step parents or step children.
Posts: 1413 | From: Reading UK | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
No - abusive step fathers are.
The consumer of the dodgy pictures is a real danger, because he creates the demand that others are fulfilling by producing these pictures.
And lets address something here - you can't find child porn just by typing the right terms into Google - you have to work at it, get the trust of an internet paedophile ring. If it was just typing "child sex picture" into Google, the police would find it a lot easier to find and close down the sites - and what search engine would index such sites anyway?
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
(crossed posts - the last was to eleighteen)
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cosmo
Shipmate
# 117
|
Posted
The issue here is concensus isn't it?
There is a world of difference between a bloke getting his rocks off looking at a picture of a twenty-five year old woman pretending to suck a banana and that of a bloke getting his rocks off looking at a picture of a five year old girl pretending to suck a banana. The twenty-five year old woman has a choice (and yes, I know that many woman are forced into prostitution and porn and all of that but the vast majority of those who work in the so-called 'Adult' industry do it by choice) to do pose for that picture; the five year old has no choice.
In this way the viewer of such a picture cannot pretend that the girl is doing it because she wants to or that she knows what she (or he of course) is doing. The viewer of child pornography is complicit in the abuse of that child in a way it might be argued the viewer of adult (mainstream) porn is not.
It is not good enough to try to alter the language used about paedophiles to those of homosexuals or women or whatever. On the one hand we are dealing with adults towards whom we can make a pretty good attempt at persuading ourselves that they are doing this porn by choice and that they are being well paid for it. On the other are a group of kids.
Homosexuality isn't a disease that can be cured or a disease that is intrinsically about the abuse of non-consenting individuals. Paedophilia is.
Cosmo
Posts: 2375 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chorister
Completely Frocked
# 473
|
Posted
I am not sure whether eleighteen has thought through what the pictures portray. Many are not just pictures of a child, they are pictures of an adult abusing a child. If such adults know that there is a market for these pictures then they are going to abuse more children to get more pictures. Therefore everyone who looks at these pictures is feeding the habit and the abuse. I think the people who look at pictures probably fall into two categories - the idiots who look and don't think of the above ramifications, and the awful people who do know the ramifications and simply don't care (and maybe even actively encourage it).
Eleighteen's arguments remind me of a programme I saw on TV back in the summer, where the paedophile who was arrested spent all his time arguing against sexual mutilation of females, to try to turn attention away from his own awful crimes. You cannot justify child pornography by saying that there are other types of pornography on the Internet - that is no excuse!
--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.
Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ariel
Shipmate
# 58
|
Posted
Thank you, Cosmo, for saying what I had intended to say, but did not get the chance to post this afternoon. Of course it is about consensuality. I saw the same documentary as Chorister, I think - I know I was struck by the insistence the paedophile placed on deflecting attention from his own case by demanding that the police concentrate on cases of female circumcision instead - two wrongs don't make a right.
Posts: 25445 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nanny Ogg
Ship's cushion
# 1176
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
Many are not just pictures of a child, they are pictures of an adult abusing a child.
Actually many photographs and pictures seized in polices raids are of children who are fully clothed. Others are of children in underwear, swimwear or school uniform. The men who "collect" them (often in their thousands) use them to stimulate sexual fantasies. There is nothing the police can do in these circumstances as it is all in the mind of the abuser.
quote:
If such adults know that there is a market for these pictures then they are going to abuse more children to get more pictures.
There is an internet trade between individuals usually through user groups. Most however are not paid for - they are simply photographs taken and shared between groups of people with similar peversions.
With the number of photographs found in any one paedophiles "collection" numbering in the thousands it takes an extremely long time to process any court case and convict them. In the mean time these people are free to carry on without much constraint (except perhaps bail terms). There is not even any restriction on them purchasing new computer equipment and being on the internet during this time, or any subsequent time should they recieve a non-custodial sentence.
--------------------
Buy me a beer and I'm you friend forever
Posts: 4137 | From: Away with the fairies | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chorister
Completely Frocked
# 473
|
Posted
So what do we do about it then? We don't usually go round taking photos of our children in the nuddy (apart from maybe one obligatory 'baby in the bath' snap) but we cannot avoid ever having our children photographed on the offchance of them falling into the hands of some paedophile!
Surely the police are right to concentrate on the obvious offenders rather than those with pictures of children in school uniform?
--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.
Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
coffee jim
Shipmate
# 3510
|
Posted
Yes, it is disturbing to know that the smashing of a US child porn ring uncovered thousands (not hundreds) of UK users, including 90 cops. What we need to be asking is 'what can we do about it?'
Even as a non-Christian, the phrase 'there but for the grace of God go I' is a useful one when imagining the horror being a paedophile must be. Just imagine for a minute what it must be like to lust after people who cannot meaningfully consent, and to know that exposure of your orientation will result in social death at best. I'm glad I'm not in their shoes.
This is not to say that paedophiles are 'mostly harmless' or that they shouldn't be punished, but that all of them need support, however undeserving they may seem. The media tendency to conflate someone who masturbates over images of children with someone who drugs, rapes and strangles them doesn't help. What I feel is needed is a system whereby anyone who feels disturbed by their sexual desires can seek professional help in complete confidence, whether they have committed an offence or not. From what I have heard it is very, very hard to 'cure' a paedophile, so the earlier they seek help, the better.
It's here that some of the noblest Christian ideals, such as 'hating the sin but loving the sinner' and the idea that every individual is loved unconditionally by God, can really come into their own. An individual should not be condemned for finding children sexually attractive, or having hideous fantasies, but for participating (directly or indirectly) in the psychological and physical scarring of children. As far as I know, Christian groups such as the Quakers and Methodists have taken steps to support paedophiles who are committed to not (re-) offending, and I've heard some talk of a (government-backed?) initiative called Stop It Now (worrying acronym!) whereby those who feel attracted to children can contact a confidential helpline.
Posts: 367 | From: Belfast | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
daisymay
St Elmo's Fire
# 1480
|
Posted
Cosmo is spot-on about being able to consent.
And just think what it must be like for an adult who has been abused as a child and had photographs taken of that - how would you feel if you knew pictures of yourself and your abuser were circulating, on hard copies or on the net?
--------------------
London
Flickr fotos
Posts: 11224 | From: London - originally Dundee, Blairgowrie etc... | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arrietty
Ship's borrower
# 45
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by coffee jim:
Even as a non-Christian, the phrase 'there but for the grace of God go I' is a useful one when imagining the horror being a paedophile must be. Just imagine for a minute what it must be like to lust after people who cannot meaningfully consent, and to know that exposure of your orientation will result in social death at best.
There is a fairly wide concensus among practising Christians that lust(= wanting someone for thier body, not who they are) is not a basic hunman need, and so it can be resisted, even though with difficulty. Also that the ideal is that it should be resisted, regardless of the difficulty.
--------------------
i-church
Online Mission and Ministry
Posts: 6634 | From: Coventry, UK | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Basket Case
Shipmate
# 1812
|
Posted
from coffee jim:
quote:
Just imagine for a minute what it must be like to lust after people who cannot meaningfully consent, and to know that exposure of your orientation will result in social death at best. I'm glad I'm not in their shoes.
Jim, in my experience, it hasn’t worked like that. A pedophile in my family has recently been exposed & not criminally prosecuted. This is due to the fact that the abuser is a very high-status person (& arrogant, I might add), & the children’s parents, though willing to report to the police, were not willing to expose their children to a criminal court, given that the accused says the children are lying, & there was no physical evidence or bodily damage.
This man is my mother’s brother, & there are numerous reasons for me to believe that what the children said is true. However, rather than “social death”, most of my family has clamped the lid on any discussion of the subject, other than to express sympathy for my uncle as a "poor,sick man", & question the motives & family loyalty of those of us who believe the charges.
I am very much in favor of the programs, such as you mentioned by the Quakers, so that those who do acknowledge & regret the problem can get help - but the much more common scenario is their refusal to acknowledge the issue, or that they need help. They tend to be very arrogant, power-hungry, & socially retarded.
Posts: 1157 | From: Pomo (basket) country | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nightlamp
Shipmate
# 266
|
Posted
Eleighteen I suspect you had a brain transplant with a maggot since only one would equate homosexuality with paedophilia. I may have misunderstood your post if so be clearer so as to avoid coming across like a complete idiot.
Nightlamp
Hellhost
--------------------
I don't know what you are talking about so it couldn't have been that important- Nightlamp
Posts: 8442 | From: Midlands | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
John Donne
Renaissance Man
# 220
|
Posted
Let me get this straight:
A board fundie who rails against the evils of homosexuality is defending paedophiles in possession of child porn?
Stop now eleighteen, before you destroy the credibility of the board inerrantists by association.
Posts: 13667 | From: Perth, W.A. | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
eleighteen
Shipmate
# 2736
|
Posted
Ignoring the personal abuse, I would like to clarify that I am not defending those found with child pornography, rather I am against the rabid witch-hunt against those accused of it.
Child "abuse" as a result of the permissive society (divorce, absent fathers etc. etc.) is a far, far more pressing problem than kiddy fiddlers.
I remember reading - I think Theodore Dalrymple - decry the hypocrisy of the mob attacking the van carrying a still innocent man after the Soham murders. Many of those present were probably guilty of all sorts of abuse (and would be too arrogant to recognise the fact). But hey, these people are monsters because of what they do to 'ver kids right? The absent, criminal father can feel morally superior and give these nonces what they deserve. Scum!
I would expect a Christian talkboard to perhaps take a differing view to the world, instead of taking on its twisted morals. Yes they must be stopped, but how about a bit of compassion for the protgonists?
--------------------
The disbelieving husband is sanctified through the wife (I Cor 7.14)........(thinks)..... woo-hooo!
Posts: 52 | From: overboard | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Merseymike
Shipmate
# 3022
|
Posted
Hold on...these people have been found with child pornography, which they have paid for via credit cards.
That isn't a witch-hunt : that is the active purchase of child pornography and an example of a successful attempt to deal with it.
As Cosmo and others have said , consent and power over others is the main issue here.
I disagree with the sort of vigilantism which we have seen in Portsmouth etc. , and I do think there are genuine problems with some of the cases which involve events of 25 years ago or more, in terms of the safety of conviction.
But child abuse is a real problem, and most of it isn't carried out by furtive looking losers outside school gates, but within families, and by those known to the children - the victims are mostly girls, not that you would recognise that from the reporting of ths topic.
I think that eleighteen's comparisons are totally irrelevant, and as usual, a way of trying to be provocative and controversial.
--------------------
Christianity is not a problem to be solved, but a mystery to be experienced
Posts: 3360 | From: Walked the plank | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moo
Ship's tough old bird
# 107
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Arrietty:
There is a fairly wide concensus among practising Christians that lust(= wanting someone for thier body, not who they are) is not a basic hunman need, and so it can be resisted, even though with difficulty. Also that the ideal is that it should be resisted, regardless of the difficulty.
![[Not worthy!]](graemlins/notworthy.gif)
Moo
--------------------
Kerygmania host
---------------------
See you later, alligator.
Posts: 20365 | From: Alleghany Mountains of Virginia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
eleighteen
Shipmate
# 2736
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by The Coot:
Let me get this straight:
A board fundie who rails against the evils of homosexuality is defending paedophiles in possession of child porn?
Stop now eleighteen, before you destroy the credibility of the board inerrantists by association.
Interestingly, a certain evangelical with a ministry in comic books once wrote an interesting tract on this subject called "Lisa".
Sadly its' no longer available but a review can be found at http://www.chickcomics.com
--------------------
The disbelieving husband is sanctified through the wife (I Cor 7.14)........(thinks)..... woo-hooo!
Posts: 52 | From: overboard | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Erin
Meaner than Godzilla
# 2
|
Posted
Garden Hermit, eleighteen, I will take a moment to remind you that there are victims of pedophiles posting on these boards. I have been the "victim", so to speak, of adultery. I guarantee that the damage done to me is completely non-existent compared to the pain and betrayal that these victims live with every day of their lives. Your apparent sympathy for pedophiles is frightening.
quote:
Originally posted by Garden Hermit:
If you disagree maybe we should draw a hierarchy of sins ? eg Murder 10, Rape/Child Abuse 9, Knee Capping/Adultery 8, Stabbing/Wounding 7, Buglary 6, Phone Mugging 5, Graffiti 3 etc.
Actually, child abuse/molestation is a 262 on this particular scale.
--------------------
Commandment number one: shut the hell up.
Posts: 17140 | From: 330 miles north of paradise | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ariel
Shipmate
# 58
|
Posted
To draw up a hierarchy of sins and give them a weighting seems like a curiously cold-blooded way of dealing with real human emotions. I find this almost as disturbing as the premises of some of the arguments put forward here.
Posts: 25445 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Erin
Meaner than Godzilla
# 2
|
Posted
I dunno... what kind of "real human emotion" is involved in sticking your wick into some innocent six-year-old?
--------------------
Commandment number one: shut the hell up.
Posts: 17140 | From: 330 miles north of paradise | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
daisymay
St Elmo's Fire
# 1480
|
Posted
The "real human emotion" might be the realisation of the real guilt and real shame you were carrying because of the violation of a child or children you had committed.
And you would need to capitalise on that guilt and shame to change your behaviour.
Give the police and authorities information about where you got all the net porn from. Agree not to have access to the net. Give the authorities information about physically sexually abusing children.
Get out of any place where you have access to children or people who provide you with children or pictures of children.
Be open with your family about what you have done - otherwise it gets passed on. I don't mean that abused people go on to abuse others, but that family secrets often reoccur generationally.
Be prepared to make amends and compensate for what you have done.
Don't expect forgiveness. It's the abused person's right to give or withold forgiveness.
--------------------
London
Flickr fotos
Posts: 11224 | From: London - originally Dundee, Blairgowrie etc... | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
