|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: The demonisation of sex offenders
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
One of the strands coming out of the Jimmy Savile thread in Hell is the way that the press (the quote suggests the Murdoch press in particular) is demonising the BBC and the Jimmy Savile.
There are two strands to this, the way the media are using the scandal, as pointed oub by alienfromzog
quote:
Please pause with me for a moment and reflect on the level of cynicism one needs to have to exploit stories of child-abuse in order to pursue agenda. Although of course, the NOW has particular form on this.
And a number of us have raised our concerns that the demonisation of Jimmy Savile deflects attention from where sex offenders are usually found:
quote:
alienfromzog [M]ore worryingly Savile is a big part of the on-going narrative that abuse - especially sexual abuse is committed by 'weirdos' and 'others.' This is such a dangerous fallacy. The VAST majority of abuse is by family and friends. And you can't spot a child-sex-offender by looking at them.
quote:
quetzalcoatl I think the media can produce the image of a kind of demonic Other, who is the sex abuser, when it is likely to be the guy next door, who appears perfectly OK, and chats to you about football or the weather.
How do we stop ourselves being swept into this mental distancing of abuse? The wish to believe that abuse is carried out by "The Other" and not by our neighbours so that we can
quote:
alienfromzog realise the need to believe victims. Or at least to take testimony at face value and investigate. It is true that there has been a big culture change in the last 30 years but there's still a long way to go. Many abusers manipulate their victims to conspire with them to maintain a silence about their abuse. How much worse when society takes part in this conspiracy too.
How do we act to stop society taking part in this conspiracy too?
[ 28. January 2013, 23:55: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
And following on from Marvin the Martian's post in Hell, how do we balance listening to victims and protecting the innocent from mischievous (in the legal sense) allegations.
It is a real issue. I've seen teachers suspended for months for investigation following an allegation by a student that has later been shown to be false.
But offenders will act in such a way that their victims believe that they will lose everything or chose to be in their situation so it's very difficult for them to come forward.
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
alienfromzog
Ship's Alien
# 5327
|
Posted
Marvin really does have a point about the dangers of false-accusations in our culture of a lynch-mob-mentality.
And I don't mean to undermine the principle of innocent until proven guilty. Ever. I do accept the sad truth that any justice system that actually protects us will allow some guilty to go free.
But I was getting at more the horrendous unbelief of people in positions of power and responsibility.
There are lots of rumours going around about Jimmy. One is that a few of his victims did come forward at the time to various authorities and were not believed. I'm not saying he should have been imprisoned and vilified just because someone said so, but that the victims should be listened to and a proper investigation take place.
Sadly there are a small number of troubled people who will make malicious allegations. But they are rare. And moreover the shocking thing about JS, it their seems to be plenty of corroboration, so any kind of investigation would quickly have established the truth.
The press frenzy that would have followed is - as I said - part of the problem of how child abuse is viewed in our culture; horrific, rare, and done by weirdo-strangers and 'others.'
Sadly and this is the real problem, only one of those three is true.
AFZ
--------------------
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.
[Sen. D.P.Moynihan]
An Alien's View of Earth - my blog (or vanity exercise...)
Posts: 2150 | From: Zog, obviously! Straight past Alpha Centauri, 2nd planet on the left... | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
I heartily agree that allegations should be investigated. What I think we need is an ironclad legal guarantee of anonymity for both accuser and accused for the duration of the proceedings, to be continued in perpetuity should the charges be dropped or the verdict be "not guilty".
Though to be fair, I don't see why we shouldn't have that for any crime.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
alienfromzog
Ship's Alien
# 5327
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
What I think we need is an ironclad legal guarantee of anonymity for both accuser and accused for the duration of the proceedings, to be continued in perpetuity should the charges be dropped or the verdict be "not guilty".
Though to be fair, I don't see why we shouldn't have that for any crime.
I think you might be on to something there. The only caveat I have is that some wise people I respect who know more about it than me think it problematic. And I don't feel I know quite enough to hold a firm view. I definitely tilt that way though. Any shipmates have a good grasp of the arguments either way?
AFZ
--------------------
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.
[Sen. D.P.Moynihan]
An Alien's View of Earth - my blog (or vanity exercise...)
Posts: 2150 | From: Zog, obviously! Straight past Alpha Centauri, 2nd planet on the left... | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by alienfromzog:
The only caveat I have is that some wise people I respect who know more about it than me think it problematic.
I've heard the argument that holding trials in secret is not good in terms of protecting the public from tyranny and suchlike.
But if the restrictions on publication of details were lifted the moment a guilty verdict was reached, that would solve the problem wouldn't it?
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
By confidential do you mean not keeping records?
Weren't there whispers about Ian Huntley under another police force (and another name) before the Soham murders? He's the reason we all have to produce birth certificates as part of the CRB checks nowadays.
In so many of these recent cases, hasn't it been the case that when investigated after the event, evidence seems to show that things could have been stopped earlier if those small indications could have been picked up earlier.
I don't know how you balance safety and not falsely accusing the wrong people, it's why I'm asking the questions.
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Liopleurodon
Mighty sea creature
# 4836
|
Posted
Part of this, I think, is the importance of letting the people who have the experience and training do the actual criminal investigation bit. For the most part, if someone comes to you and makes an allegation, you're not necessarily going to know whether it's true or not (though you may have your suspicions either way) and the fact is, that's ok. Where things seem to have gone astray with the Savile FUBAR (and in many other cases) is not that it was thoroughly investigated and then he was let off the hook. It's that for one reason or another, it never seemed to make it to the thorough investigation stage.
It is important, for the (alleged) victim's sake, that allegations are taken seriously enough to be investigated rather than being written off for spurious reasons. It is important for anyone who's accused that the investigation is done in a discreet and thorough manner without any assumption of guilt from the start. In the meantime, it's probably necessary to keep the accuser and accused away from each other for both their sakes. It should be possible to do all of this in a well-run investigation, although sometimes things get complicated. Things are particularly complicated in the case of teachers, because kids know that making a false accusation against a teacher is a very effective way to make that teacher's life very difficult, and because the authorities have to take these allegations seriously in terms of actions taken - even if they strongly suspect that the kid is making it up. There's no easy way around that.
Posts: 1921 | From: Lurking under the ship | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
Weren't there whispers about Ian Huntley under another police force (and another name) before the Soham murders?
Whispers mean nothing. He was never even charged with a crime prior to Soham, let alone convicted of one.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
You are right Liopleurodon to talk of the need for proper training of those who conduct the investigations. There have been several cases here go completely off the rails because of the improper nature of the investigation.
As for anonymity - the rule here is that even if the complainant is well and truly adult by the time of trial, nothing can be published which would reveal that person's identity. This can lead to preservation of the anonymity of the accused. Should the accused have been a minor at the time it is alleged that the offences occurred, there will again be preservation of anonymity. Otherwise, the usual procedure is that there is no hiding of that person's identity. And as Marvin points out, there is a nasty history which goes with secret trials.
[ 23. October 2012, 11:27: Message edited by: Gee D ]
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
Here in the UK, for an enhanced CRB check, which is what I hold and am about to have updated, records are checked back for a number of years (10?) and any queries on that record can mean no clearance for employment.
Now, as Marvin says, there are problems with this. For a short time a few years back I had a neighbour whose kids made a total pain of themselves. When I finally got fed up of the permanent door knocking / foot in door / refusal to go away / abuse and aggro from the kids and shouted at them, the mother reported me to the police for child abuse. The feeling of panic was indescribable, because if that complaint went on my record it could cause me major employment problems. Said neighbour told me I had to go down to the police station and discuss my behaviour. Which I did. Fortunately, my record is totally clean and as the policeman showed me this neighbour had a pile of computer printout that measured in inches, so it was a fairly amiable chat and I was believed. But that was two or three days I'd prefer not to live through again.
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by alienfromzog:
The only caveat I have is that some wise people I respect who know more about it than me think it problematic.
I've heard the argument that holding trials in secret is not good in terms of protecting the public from tyranny and suchlike.
But if the restrictions on publication of details were lifted the moment a guilty verdict was reached, that would solve the problem wouldn't it?
Isn't the issue that if I have the crucial piece of information that will exonerate X, but don't know that X is on trial, then my crucial piece of information is likely to escape notice?
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moo
Ship's tough old bird
# 107
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martian on the Hell thread
While it remains the case that even a false accusation, if made public, will destroy the life of the one accused, I cannot agree. The presumption of innocence must be preserved. The innocent must be protected, even at the cost of allowing a few guilty people to go unpunished.
What especially disturbs me is that even when it is clear that an accusation is false, the name of the accuser is kept confidential while the name(s) of the accused are published.
Moo
--------------------
Kerygmania host
---------------------
See you later, alligator.
Posts: 20365 | From: Alleghany Mountains of Virginia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
Secret trials are a bad idea. Both a logistical nightmare and too much potential for abuse.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
The problem with the title of the thread is that it is rhetorical. Sexual offenders demonize themselves. By their behaviour and associated thought / emotional processes.
First, let's ensure we're using the right language. It is sexual assault, which means an attack containing violence. Using the word "abuse" or "sexual abuse" makes it sound like something other than violent. Sexual behaviour without consent is violence.
Second, let's consider what the offender must do. (I'll use "he" because most of the offenders are male). He must fail to recognize the humanness of the child or older person he assaults. He must fail to put himself in the place of the person he assaults. For example, he must fail completely with empathy, while putting his penis or fingers into their mouth, vagina or anus.
Third, he must distort reality such that he believes that the person assaulted wanted it or sort of wanted it, because he inculcated cooperation or otherwise had the person cooperate, that it was a mutual activity. Of course, if he restrains the person or hits them, the lies he must tell himself are approaching hallucination.
Fourth, he must lie to himself and not face the fact of his behaviour, failure to control his atavistic impulses, and to have behaved on the basis of impulse or instinct. No-one who does this does not know it is wrong.
Fifth, he must fantasize about the sexual assault interaction before and after it occurs, rehearsing the distortions of reality, the lies he told himself, and focus on the gratification of his animal impulses. They all masturbate about their assaults.
Thus, I would strongly suggest that sexual offenders demonize themselves, without the help of society, those they've attacked and their families. Society merely confirms the fact that we all know to be true. The offender knows that he is a demon, and if he does not seem to, well, we're back at distortion of reality and lying to himself. It is much worse for society to forgive an unrepentant or partially repentant person, because them their misbehaviour, mis-thinking and empathy failure are fully or partially confirmed. Thus facilitative of further sexual assault.
In terms of societal response, the best ideas are a continuum of monitoring, supervision and control, with the most severe and repetitive such persons to be locked away permanently, others to be on permanent electronic monitoring, with relaxation of the supervision only based on risk and harm reduction. It is like diabetes: not cured, but hopefully managed.
[ 23. October 2012, 15:10: Message edited by: no prophet ]
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet:
Thus, I would strongly suggest that sexual offenders demonize themselves
Absofuckinlutely no prophet.
Brilliant post.
![[Overused]](graemlins/notworthy.gif)
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
anteater
Ship's pest-controller
# 11435
|
Posted
Problem #1 I have with the OP is the loose use of the word "demonise" which IMHO is much overused. What exactly is intended?
In normal usage it has nothing to do with belief about demons, and usually just means severe censure. Do we gain anything from the use of lurid language?
Problem #2: I have not heard any severe censure of the BBC, only serious questions. Maybe I read the wrong newspapers. If it is true that the BBC stopped the investigation so as not to clash with the Saville tributes already scheduled or for other political motives, surely severe censure is due? I don't have a problem with this.
As regards the case in question, and whether it detracts attention from the more numerous and mundane cases, I don't see why it should. To me, this is more like the Strauss-Kahn allegations, and has more to do with the issue of celebrities being effectively above the law. Also in this case, the poor level of protection within institutions for vulnerable people.
These specific issues are worth raising and I do not see why this negatively impacts the prosecution of other cases.
Does anyone really believe that in this case, there is smoke but no fire? I find that hard to understand, and for me the evidence is sufficient to justify severe censure of Saville, given that no punishment can be applied.
--------------------
Schnuffle schnuffle.
Posts: 2538 | From: UK | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
alienfromzog
Ship's Alien
# 5327
|
Posted
no prophet, you are spot on and also extremely eloquent.
But that's not quite the point that I and others were making on the other thread. The issue is not whether sex-offenders are committing profound evil. The issue is this focus on the weirdo or the strange guy or so-called paedophiles.
The vast vast majority of child-abusers are very normal looking otherwise nice, normal people. THIS is the problem. You cannot spot a child-abuser by looking at them.
My grave concern with whole Savile affair is that this narrative is further fuelled and thus children are less protected this violence.
AFZ
--------------------
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.
[Sen. D.P.Moynihan]
An Alien's View of Earth - my blog (or vanity exercise...)
Posts: 2150 | From: Zog, obviously! Straight past Alpha Centauri, 2nd planet on the left... | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by alienfromzog:
no prophet, you are spot on and also extremely eloquent.
But that's not quite the point that I and others were making on the other thread. The issue is not whether sex-offenders are committing profound evil. The issue is this focus on the weirdo or the strange guy or so-called paedophiles.
The vast vast majority of child-abusers are very normal looking otherwise nice, normal people. THIS is the problem. You cannot spot a child-abuser by looking at them.
My grave concern with whole Savile affair is that this narrative is further fuelled and thus children are less protected this violence.
AFZ
I'm not sure the focus you suggest captures the issues, but okay.
Of course we must follow that additional commandment "thou shalt not judge a book by its cover". But once the book is open, and we've seen a good measure of words and even full colour photos, we'd better set about judging, and we'd better do it quickly to prevent harm to others.
To say it another way, first impressions can be deceiving, but second, third and fourth etc can be confirmatory. This is why we are, as societies, so down on child pornography. Access that, and we know some of your pages, and we will judge you.
I don't know this man, but I am struck with the parallels to Sandusky, the American football coach who has been sentenced now to die in jail for raping boys. His pages were available and the readers of them decided to close the book and not discuss. Parallels to Irish and Boston priests, Boy Scouts, Indian Residential Schools, yadda yadda. To clarify, it is not appearance, but it is available history that some people deliberately suppress or irresponsibly ignore.
It is perhaps not fair to the "hindsight is 20-20" argument, because hindsight might give us at least glimmers of the truth of some the people who are weirdos and sexual assaulters. Though a glass darkly. People do not hide themselves that well. They are social, they leave at least clues. Sex offenders start offending in their teens most of them (I've been through the Correctional Service of Canada information on sex offenders for other motivations). It cannot be that nothing was know of this Saville.
I am not sure how children are less protected in this scenario.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
anteater
Ship's pest-controller
# 11435
|
Posted
alienfromzog:
quote:
The vast vast majority of child-abusers are very normal looking otherwise nice, normal people.
Is there any proof of that?
The only two cases I know well, both involving serial rape of children, would not fit that category at all.
--------------------
Schnuffle schnuffle.
Posts: 2538 | From: UK | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
Please don't let your anti-Daily-Mail prejudice blind you to what, I believe, is a very good article.
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dark Knight
Super Zero
# 9415
|
Posted
Far from eloquent or brilliant, no prophet's post was a very good example of exactly the process of demonization that is under discussion.
Most of the points he/she made are conjectural. It was essentially a caricature of an abuser.
And the decision to use the male pronoun is, in my opinion, offensive. So what if most abusers are male? Many are female.
The problem with such characterizations is that they can lead to pitchforks and lynch mobs, and this is particularly troubling when accusations are made without substantiation.
Equally problematic, as others have pointed out, is the fact that creating a monster in peoples' minds allows abusers who are 'just like us' to slide under the radar. If only weirdos and creeps touch children or rape people, than we can continue in the fool's paradise of ignorance, ignoring the fact that it is likely to be someone the victim knows and maybe even trusts who is the perpetrator. You always hear how nice John Wayne Gacy's neighbours thought he was.
--------------------
So don't ever call me lucky
You don't know what I done, what it was, who I lost, or what it cost me - A B Original: I C U
----
Love is as strong as death (Song of Solomon 8:6).
Posts: 2958 | From: Beyond the Yellow Brick Road | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dark Knight
Super Zero
# 9415
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by anteater:
alienfromzog:
quote:
The vast vast majority of child-abusers are very normal looking otherwise nice, normal people.
Is there any proof of that?
The only two cases I know well, both involving serial rape of children, would not fit that category at all.
Given that it is believed that child abuse is significantly under-reported, I would suggest the number of cases you don't know well, that are happening (if the stats are accurate) in your proximity, may underscore AFZ's point.
More on underreporting
--------------------
So don't ever call me lucky
You don't know what I done, what it was, who I lost, or what it cost me - A B Original: I C U
----
Love is as strong as death (Song of Solomon 8:6).
Posts: 2958 | From: Beyond the Yellow Brick Road | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alogon
Cabin boy emeritus
# 5513
|
Posted
Every society has to demonise someone. Those who have (or desire) sex with people under age 18, or however the age of consent is defined, are the currently favored scapegoats. Those are under the age of consent themselves are not exempt. Clearly, belief in God is not a prerequisite for fiercely puritanical strictures.
It's also interesting how many other perversions society allows itself in the name of demonising this one. To voyeurism we can now add what amounts to pyromania. Someone in the NCAA has suddenly decided that, all these years everyone assumed that the organization was about excellence in playing football, it was really all about chastity in retired assistant coaches, and an entire university is on the ropes. Am I the only one going ![[Eek!]](eek.gif) ![[Killing me]](graemlins/killingme.gif) ?
--------------------
Patriarchy (n.): A belief in original sin unaccompanied by a belief in God.
Posts: 7808 | From: West Chester PA | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
No Dark Knight, not conjectural. I refuse to have have a theoretical discussion about ideas and concepts when the full scene is about emotion, pain and suffering. I've been through the Correctional Services Canada data as I previously noted. I'm not about to provide you a reading list. I doubt very much that other countries' numbers and proportions vary much. Less than 10% of sex offenders are women. The nature of female sex offender offences differs. They engage in different sorts of offences, have more psychiatric problems and histories of violence sexual and otherwise. So the summary is "he". The person under discussion, Saviile, is a 'he'.
An appreciation of suffering is required to gain empathy. I don't believe in simple retribution and retaliation, I do firmly believe in keeping those who would be harmful away from those they have shown they are wont to harm.
Are you suggesting 'love the sinner, hate the sin'? Okay, send their junk to jail, they can decide to accompany it or not. Didn't Jesus say that about eyes? Balls or eyeballs, what is the difference? Empathy for offenders is misplaced until there is empathy for those harmed by them. It doesn't matter if they feel demonized, it's not the priority.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alogon:
Someone in the NCAA has suddenly decided that, all these years everyone assumed that the organization was about excellence in playing football, it was really all about chastity in retired assistant coaches, and an entire university is on the ropes. Am I the only one going ?
Will you please clarify what situation you're talking about? If it's Sandusky and Penn State, I'm having extreme difficulty reconciling your statement with 40+ counts of sexual assault against young boys over 15 years and football being more important. So you must be talking about something else. If not, well, if you're not part the solution, you're part of the problem (now where's that quote from?)
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alogon
Cabin boy emeritus
# 5513
|
Posted
And I'm having extreme difficulty understanding how the activities of one employee who had retired in 1999 can possibly be construed to negate the acknowledged excellence of an entire sports team during the next decade.
If it is your position, as it seems to be, that there is no limit to your arbitrary ability to spread blame for the harm done by one man, then you exemplify exactly what I am talking about. What are you going to burn down next?
These bizarre sacrifices are part of a safety valve for a society in trouble. Obviously, our society is in a lot of trouble.
--------------------
Patriarchy (n.): A belief in original sin unaccompanied by a belief in God.
Posts: 7808 | From: West Chester PA | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
no prophet - I don't think that it is as simple as you're suggesting. Those prolific sex offenders, as Jimmy Savile seems to have been, are usually found to have been showing signs of these patterns of behaviour from much younger, when they are identified and their histories investigated. This is why we have the CRB (Criminal Records Bureau) checks we do in the UK which checks to ensure that nothing has been noted in the past.
Those sex offenders are also pretty exceptional and we find them so offensive we dehumanise them in our minds. This means we miss the local offender who is not so prolific or looks normal to us.
And the risk from monitoring every slightly worrying piece of behaviour is that many innocent people are being labelled. I work with young people in schools and have known a number of teachers who have been suspended pending inquiries following malicious claims by students.
Did you not read my account of worrying myself sick when I was accused of abusing a neighbour's children?
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
alienfromzog
Ship's Alien
# 5327
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by anteater:
alienfromzog:
quote:
The vast vast majority of child-abusers are very normal looking otherwise nice, normal people.
Is there any proof of that?
The only two cases I know well, both involving serial rape of children, would not fit that category at all.
Yes.
Slightly dated now, but a Home Office Report (UK) from 1998
This quote caught my attention,
quote:
From the report:
In this context it should be noted that while sexual abuse by a stranger is what tends to be of most concern to the general public and is of most interest to the media, it is actually abuse within the family, or by an individual who has a relationship of trust with the child, that is not only more common, but also on the whole more damaging.
but to return to the point:
quote:
From the report:
Overall, the relationship between social functioning and sexual offending varies between individuals. Neither low mood nor social isolation, for example, are likely to be closely related to the offending of the minority of men whose targeting of children is a specific objective congruent with their own general desires and goals. In addition, research in England has found considerable heterogeneity in the social competence of child abusers when compared with a community sample. Incest offenders were indistinguishable from non-offending men while extrafamilial abusers of boys in particular had lower self-esteem, poorer assertion, and high levels of emotional loneliness
[Emphasis mine] The reason for emphasising that paragraph is that incest offenders are statistically the biggest group.
(5-10% of abusers are female).
AFZ
--------------------
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.
[Sen. D.P.Moynihan]
An Alien's View of Earth - my blog (or vanity exercise...)
Posts: 2150 | From: Zog, obviously! Straight past Alpha Centauri, 2nd planet on the left... | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
alienfromzog
Ship's Alien
# 5327
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
Please don't let your anti-Daily-Mail prejudice blind you to what, I believe, is a very good article.
Mudfrod, really? ![[Projectile]](graemlins/puke2.gif)
That's just Melanie Phillips (in a way that sadly is not remotely out of character) using the stories of horrendous abuse of children to cynically attack and slur people she doesn't like. I have only one word for that: evil.
![[Mad]](angryfire.gif)
AFZ
--------------------
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.
[Sen. D.P.Moynihan]
An Alien's View of Earth - my blog (or vanity exercise...)
Posts: 2150 | From: Zog, obviously! Straight past Alpha Centauri, 2nd planet on the left... | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
I don't know the details re why the university was censured. I agree with the censuring of the offender. Do you have a problem with that Algon? Perhaps there's something alleging a systemic problem at Penn State re sex assault? If there is, then some sort of respond may be warranted.
I am sorry to hear about unfounded allegations Curiousity Killed, no I did not connect that up. I'm on the other side as you may know from other past threads, where as I've dealt with an attack on a family member. It may be that we're talking about some of the grey areas between false and true allegations when it comes to this discussion. All I can say in our situation is "DNA identification" where there is no doubt, and ongoing attention to it, daily, where it's rubbed in.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Silent Acolyte
Shipmate
# 1158
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet:
The problem with the title of the thread [and all the rest]
The problem with this post is that it swaddles its despicable core quote:
The offender knows that he is a demon
with an apparently reasonable retelling of the purportedly unarguable circumstances:- Violence is redefined beyond all recognition, in much the same way that the poor beleaguered British Muslims are "terrorized" by cartoons on paper and by a ridiculous video.
- The offender "must fail to recognize the humanness of" his victim.
- He must distort reality to the point of hallucination,
- while, of course, simultaneously knowing his behavior is wrong.
- He must be a masturbator.
- His fellow citizens' only role is condemnatory, never culpable or contributory.
Which brings us all the way 'round to Alogon's point.
We always need a bogeyman, a scapegoat, one to bear blame.
Witches, reds and pinkos, faggots and dykes, wogs and other assorted mud-people all had their turn in the stocks. Now, it's time for the skinners: the rapists and pedophiles.
It's despicable, because all the while we decry the inhumanity of the perpetrator's actions, we gleefully strip him of his own humanity and declare him to be a demon, Them, something Other than who we are.
Is the perpetrator assailed by demons? Yes.
Is the perpetrator a demon himself? Absolutely not.
Quoting from the 1979 American Prayer Book funeral service, the perpetrator was created quote:
a sheep of [the merciful Savior's] own fold, a lamb of thine own flock, a sinner of thine own redeeming
and it is not our place to deny him that Image and Likeness.
Posts: 7462 | From: The New World | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
Please don't let your anti-Daily-Mail prejudice blind you to what, I believe, is a very good article.
In what sense? You have a commentator who is all about moral relativity when it comes to the causes she supports, who believes in religion for others because it's a useful fiction, mentioning the sexualisation of children, in a publication which is full of the sexualisation of society and celebrity culture which leads to it.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Silent Acolyte
Shipmate
# 1158
|
Posted
I withdraw point 1 of my "circumstances", above.
I'm happy to argue the point separately, but it's tangential to my main criticism of no prophet's post.
Posts: 7462 | From: The New World | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
no prophet - for earlier offending in a pattern of offending, are you sure there will be DNA evidence? Because I'm not.
To give you another example. Sex offenders are assumed to be "other" and "different". I have a neighbour who is almost certainly on the Autistic Spectrum. He lacks social skills and a register to judge appropriate and inappropriate behaviour. Socially he is on a level with children. He is single and living alone. When he first moved here and started talking to the local children the immediate assumption from some of the parents was that this neighbour is a sex offender and because he talked to the children he was grooming them. I had to practically hold a group of parents back from lynching this man.
Now I know that this guy is unlikely to get near these mothers. They are far more likely to be at risk from a man who dates them and then grooms their children.
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
Empathy failure is a hallmark of sexual offenders.
Have a look at the literature on the PCL-R, e.g. here. You can also do a lit search on a few people if motivated, e.g., Vern Quinsey, Karl Hanson, or a good summary of research, e.g., Council on Sex Offender Treatment Treatment of Sex Offenders - Recidivism (Texas).
If someone is diagnosed with sexual psychopathy, isn't just another way of saying "demon". Merely a choice of language. You can say it's wrong if you want to. But correctional services do what you don't like, and I agree with them because they keep some offenders away from the vulnerable.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Hairy Biker
Shipmate
# 12086
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
Ri-i-ight! So you want to lock up all those with poor social skills and label them as potential sex offenders?
Yeah, and all the ones with strange facial hair, just to be on the safe side.
--------------------
there [are] four important things in life: religion, love, art and science. At their best, they’re all just tools to help you find a path through the darkness. None of them really work that well, but they help.
Damien Hirst
Posts: 683 | From: This Sceptred Isle | Registered: Nov 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alogon
Cabin boy emeritus
# 5513
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet:
I agree with the censuring of the offender. Do you have a problem with that Algon?
Censuring? You mean when he was told no longer to bring kids on campus or to events with the team, of course I have no problem. That happened about ten years ago. His own charitable organization also limited his contact. These two moves cramped his style greatly: have we heard of any incidents since? We seem to forget that this is old news. Nor do I have a problem with his conviction. There seems to be abundant evidence-- although there is also evidence that a few stories have been fabricated by soi-disant victims who smell money.
As for Penn State officials, yeah, a few people goofed. If I could single one person out, it would be the vice president in charge of the campus police, to whom a report was made and he failed to act upon it. It also transpired that a few people had goofed when the Virginia Tech massacre happened, killing thirty-two and wounding seventeen people. Why wasn't the perp identified as a potential troublemaker sooner? Why were those on campus not notified sooner? But that institution's financial liability paled by comparison.
Where I work, a police officer spoke to our department only yesterday, adumbrating the numerous precautions taken on our relatively modest-sized campus, including fifty-three outdoor "blue light" emergency phones (checked once a week) and four hundred surveillance cameras. The number of i's they must dot and t's cross is stunning. I'm so glad I work in my department rather than his. Nevertheless, he literally knocked on wood several times in front of us hoping that this- that- or the other would never happen here.
However, nothing, even protecting the lives of children, or "children", rouses the emotions of the public like protecting their virginity. And emotions often supersede logic. That is what this thread is about.
--------------------
Patriarchy (n.): A belief in original sin unaccompanied by a belief in God.
Posts: 7808 | From: West Chester PA | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
Ri-i-ight! So you want to lock up all those with poor social skills and label them as potential sex offenders?
No, didn't suggest that. However, if someone has an history of sex offending, confirmed and known, their past behaviour is relevant in regulating their behaviour, including long term supervision and monitoring. And if this labels them as 'demon', well, whatever.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
alienfromzog
Ship's Alien
# 5327
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alogon:
However, nothing, even protecting the lives of children, or "children", rouses the emotions of the public like protecting their virginity. And emotions often supersede logic. That is what this thread is about.
Yep. And my main point is that whilst I totally agree with no prophet that all sexual assault should be consider a violence, the mass hysteria does not in any way make children safer. If it actually did then we would be into the whole debate about convicting the guilty vs acquitting the innocent but it doesn't. If anything it has the opposite affect.
The point is this; MOST CHILD ABUSE (including sexual) OCCURS AT HOME BY FAMILY and friends and whilst the stereo-typical predatory paedophiles are indeed very dangerous, they are a small part of the problem. If we are serious about safe-guarding children then let's focus on the 90+%.
AFZ
--------------------
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.
[Sen. D.P.Moynihan]
An Alien's View of Earth - my blog (or vanity exercise...)
Posts: 2150 | From: Zog, obviously! Straight past Alpha Centauri, 2nd planet on the left... | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moo
Ship's tough old bird
# 107
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alogon
It also transpired that a few people had goofed when the Virginia Tech massacre happened, killing thirty-two and wounding seventeen people. Why wasn't the perp identified as a potential troublemaker sooner? Why were those on campus not notified sooner?
The problem at Virginia Tech was that the authorities erroneously believed that privacy laws forbade them to collect this type of information on their students.
Moo
--------------------
Kerygmania host
---------------------
See you later, alligator.
Posts: 20365 | From: Alleghany Mountains of Virginia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet:
Empathy failure is a hallmark of sexual offenders.
Actually, one of the best markers of being a future perpetrator is having been a victim.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet:
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
Ri-i-ight! So you want to lock up all those with poor social skills and label them as potential sex offenders?
No, didn't suggest that. However, if someone has an history of sex offending, confirmed and known, their past behaviour is relevant in regulating their behaviour, including long term supervision and monitoring. And if this labels them as 'demon', well, whatever.
The whole problem with this is that it's pointing to the tiny minority of stranger rapes and stranger child abuse. Not the majority that is carried out by family and friends.
And your assertion that the "past behaviour is relevant in regulating their behaviour, including long term supervision and monitoring" is leading to many many innocent people having behaviour tagged that affects their options for employment, and sometimes gets them attacked or lynched.
And this whipped up hysteria in the media, part of of our demonisation of sex offenders, has meant that a paediatrician was attacked by people who thought they were dealing with a paedophile.
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
saysay
Ship's Praying Mantis
# 6645
|
Posted
In the US we've had murders of people who are listed on the sex offender's registry - some of whom are there for running afoul of an age of consent law rather than abusing children.
--------------------
"It's been a long day without you, my friend
I'll tell you all about it when I see you again"
"'Oh sweet baby purple Jesus' - that's a direct quote from a 9 year old - shoutout to purple Jesus."
Posts: 2943 | From: The Wire | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet:
Empathy failure is a hallmark of sexual offenders.
Actually, one of the best markers of being a future perpetrator is having been a victim.
Nope. Not factual. Folk wisdom. And outrageously insulting to those who've been assaulted. If we go with the Canadian Badgely Commission (1985), 1 in 4 girls and 1 in 6 (or 7 boys) have experienced some form of sexual violence. That means the base rate of sexual victimization is high enough to create a positive correlation, but it says nothing about causation. Have a look at statistics and base rates to try to get it straight.
Perpetrators may claim victimization. The word is "claim". And it does not figure into any of the rating schemes for risk of sexual offending. There is something special going on inside an offender who was also a victim, but most victims are not offenders. With a Cdn population of 32 million, half women, and 1/4 victims, that means 4 million potential offenders if we accept your idea.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
You are having a logic failure, the fact that most abusers have been abused - does not mean that most people who have been abused go on to abuse. It is a tiny fraction of that proportion of the population - but they tend to abuse multiple victims.
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by saysay:
some of whom are there for running afoul of an age of consent law rather than abusing children.
What do you mean by this ?
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
MSHB
Shipmate
# 9228
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by saysay:
In the US we've had murders of people who are listed on the sex offender's registry - some of whom are there for running afoul of an age of consent law rather than abusing children.
And this is what bothers me about terms like "sexual offender", especially "child sexual offender". Child sexual offences include other activities besides child rape or even touching a child. Downloading a cartoon of Bart Simpson engaged in sexual activities is a child sexual offence, but does not require contact of any kind with actual children - not even in the making of the cartoon. A teenage girl sending erotic photos of herself to her boyfriend ("sexting") can be a child sexual offence (cases like this have been prosecuted).
--------------------
MSHB: Member of the Shire Hobbit Brigade
Posts: 1522 | From: Dharawal Country | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dark Knight
Super Zero
# 9415
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet:
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet:
Empathy failure is a hallmark of sexual offenders.
Actually, one of the best markers of being a future perpetrator is having been a victim.
Nope. Not factual. Folk wisdom. And outrageously insulting to those who've been assaulted. If we go with the Canadian Badgely Commission (1985), 1 in 4 girls and 1 in 6 (or 7 boys) have experienced some form of sexual violence. That means the base rate of sexual victimization is high enough to create a positive correlation, but it says nothing about causation. Have a look at statistics and base rates to try to get it straight.
Aha. So you are not prepared to provide me with a 'reading list' (not that I asked for one, but your response to my post only tangentially engaged anything I said anyway)for statements which are COMPLETELY conjectural and basically unverifiable (such as 'They all masturbate about their assaults'), but when someone disagrees with you, you cite chapter and verse?
As others have indicated, it is more complex than you are suggesting. This paper notes with caution that it is a popular misconception that most offenders were offended against, but concludes far less emphatically than you:
quote:
It appears, therefore, that the relationship between childhood experiences of sexual abuse and later perpetration of child sexual abuse is a complex one that requires a great deal of further research.
--------------------
So don't ever call me lucky
You don't know what I done, what it was, who I lost, or what it cost me - A B Original: I C U
----
Love is as strong as death (Song of Solomon 8:6).
Posts: 2958 | From: Beyond the Yellow Brick Road | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
