Pedophilia Deserves Civil Rights, Says New York Times’ Op-ed

[flacaltenn]

From the OP article quoted..

Kaplan says civil rights law should be changed so that pedophiles are only stigmatized or denied jobs if law school graduates agree that they pose a “direct threat” to children.

Like I said.. Dont trust the pill-pushers to do this by themselves. And I certainly don't trust lawyers to do this. WHO DECIDES who is a threat should be some kind of new hybrid board. Much like the make-up of a parole board with adequate psych/legal/expert representation. Somebody we can sue or fire when the wrong decisions are made.

So that we don't talk past each other, can we agree that a child abuser is a person who has abused a child and that one can be a pedophile, attracted to children, without also being a child abuser?

Now read the quote in your comment. It applies to non child abusers, not child abuser.

Also, why not go right to the source of the Op-Ed instead of relying on the Daily Caller to analyze it for us. Here's the Op-Ed.

Like I said before. The acts PRECEEDING the actually pedophilia are numerous and common and amount to child abuse. Including but not limited to public exposure, intentionally grooming children by exposure to sexual acts or materials, etc.. So I don't know what the author meant by defining pedophiles who haven't committed the act. That ACT is not my only concern here.. And folks who are the ROAD to pedophilia COULD BE anyone who's already committed one of those "lesser" acts.

Seriously man.. If you read that NY Times --- WHO EXACTLY is she proposing to protect and how do you identify them???

 

[Delta4Embassy]

As we often see in the US, we focus more of our attentions on symptoms than causes. As with legislation or treatment for pedophiles instead of what causes pedophilia. I hope we can change that methodology eventually and work more on prevention than treatment.

We don't need to understand degenerate child abusers, we need to put them down.

If we understand something we can prevent it. A better tactic than waiting for another one to be discovered don't you think?

 

[bodecea]

You know what's "fair" for pedophiles? A noose!

Can we bring back drawing and quartering in the public square, just for child abusers? The town can sell tickets.

A noose is cleaner, quicker, cheaper, and more humane while performing an important function.

Just want to make sure they really are guilty....Manhattan Beach comes to mind here. They were all innocent.

 

[DriftingSand]

You know what's "fair" for pedophiles? A noose!

Can we bring back drawing and quartering in the public square, just for child abusers? The town can sell tickets.

A noose is cleaner, quicker, cheaper, and more humane while performing an important function.

That makes the assumption that sexual child abusers deserve humane treatment...

Well ... if you consider the death penalty "humane" ...

As much as I despise molesters and rapists I'm still opposed to torture. Just a quick death to remove them from society; punish them for their heinous crime; and assure society that he will never again harm a child. That's the goal.

 

[DriftingSand]

You know what's "fair" for pedophiles? A noose!

Can we bring back drawing and quartering in the public square, just for child abusers? The town can sell tickets.

A noose is cleaner, quicker, cheaper, and more humane while performing an important function.

Just want to make sure they really are guilty....Manhattan Beach comes to mind here. They were all innocent.

I agree. Not into jumping to conclusions. Absolute proof would be necessary before I would condone the death penalty.

 

[Kondor3]

You know what's "fair" for pedophiles? A noose!

Can we bring back drawing and quartering in the public square, just for child abusers? The town can sell tickets.

A noose is cleaner, quicker, cheaper, and more humane while performing an important function.

That makes the assumption that sexual child abusers deserve humane treatment...

Well ... if you consider the death penalty "humane" ...

As much as I despise molesters and rapists I'm still opposed to torture. Just a quick death to remove them from society; punish them for their heinous crime; and assure society that he will never again harm a child. That's the goal.

Oh, alright.

I guess the towns will have to do without the ticket revenue, after all...

 

[hipeter924]

You can compare the mental state of a pedophile to other mental states of people that want to do terrible things like that of a psychopath, sociopath, serial-killer or a murderer. But there is only so far you can tolerate such things, so Margo Kaplan sounds pretty crazy. The technology doesn't exist yet like you have on Star Trek or other sci-fi shows to cure people that have mental illness easily, all that can be done at the moment is keep them away from children (if necessary) - or at the very least to try and treat them with the medications and psychology techniques available.

 

[Rikurzhen]

From the OP article quoted..

Kaplan says civil rights law should be changed so that pedophiles are only stigmatized or denied jobs if law school graduates agree that they pose a “direct threat” to children.

Like I said.. Dont trust the pill-pushers to do this by themselves. And I certainly don't trust lawyers to do this. WHO DECIDES who is a threat should be some kind of new hybrid board. Much like the make-up of a parole board with adequate psych/legal/expert representation. Somebody we can sue or fire when the wrong decisions are made.

So that we don't talk past each other, can we agree that a child abuser is a person who has abused a child and that one can be a pedophile, attracted to children, without also being a child abuser?

Now read the quote in your comment. It applies to non child abusers, not child abuser.

Also, why not go right to the source of the Op-Ed instead of relying on the Daily Caller to analyze it for us. Here's the Op-Ed.

Like I said before. The acts PRECEEDING the actually pedophilia are numerous and common and amount to child abuse. Including but not limited to public exposure, intentionally grooming children by exposure to sexual acts or materials, etc.. So I don't know what the author meant by defining pedophiles who haven't committed the act. That ACT is not my only concern here.. And folks who are the ROAD to pedophilia COULD BE anyone who's already committed one of those "lesser" acts.

But all of those acts you refer to are also criminal acts. What the op-ed writer is referring to either celibate pedophiles who realize that acting on their impulses would be a crime or pedophiles who are in adult relationships but fantasize about children but don't act on their impulses. These people are not included in your scenario.

Former alcoholics who swear by Alcoholics Anonymous claim that thy are still alcoholics but no longer drink. Many of them praise the sponsor system or buddy system that AA has. If they had to deal with their alcoholism on their own, in private, in shame, in fear, they'd not be able to stay sober. Well, the pedophiles who don't act on their impulses are the counterparts to the alcoholics who beat their addiction all on their own, in private. I find the argument persuasive that some pedophiles likely need help to keep on the straight and narrow and not give in to their impulses but a Pedophiles Anonymous is not going to get off the ground when a lynch mob will show up at the meeting to greet any members. Remember, these are not yet child abusers, just people fixated on children.

 

[Rikurzhen]

Seriously man.. If you read that NY Times --- WHO EXACTLY is she proposing to protect and how do you identify them???

PRECISELY. If someone is a pedophile and not a child abuser, and would like professional help in order to keep his impulses under control, he'd have to be nuts to out himself.

 

[hipeter924]

Seriously man.. If you read that NY Times --- WHO EXACTLY is she proposing to protect and how do you identify them???

PRECISELY. If someone is a pedophile and not a child abuser, and would like professional help in order to keep his impulses under control, he'd have to be nuts to out himself.

Yep. There is no reason why someone should have to admit they are a pedophile if they are being treated for it, so long as they are under medical supervision of their doctor or specialist.This is a good article describing how it is treated these days: How do doctors treat pedophiles

How do doctors treat pedophiles?

Hormone suppressors, group therapy, and sometimes castration. Doctors do not attempt to permanently rid pedophiles of their fantasies, which are remarkably persistent. Instead, they use techniques to decrease the likelihood that the patient will act on his urges. Studies have suggested that testosterone-reducing drugs, called anti-androgens, are the most reliable option. Patients receive a monthly shot, and doctors monitor their testosterone levels to make sure the drug is working. Prozac, which is known to decrease libido as a side effect of its intended anti-depressant use, is a somewhat common but less effective alternative.[...]

 

[Rikurzhen]

Seriously man.. If you read that NY Times --- WHO EXACTLY is she proposing to protect and how do you identify them???

PRECISELY. If someone is a pedophile and not a child abuser, and would like professional help in order to keep his impulses under control, he'd have to be nuts to out himself.

Yep. There is no reason why someone should have to admit they are a pedophile if they are being treated for it, so long as they are under medical supervision of their doctor or specialist.This is a good article describing how it is treated these days: How do doctors treat pedophiles

How do doctors treat pedophiles?

Hormone suppressors, group therapy, and sometimes castration. Doctors do not attempt to permanently rid pedophiles of their fantasies, which are remarkably persistent. Instead, they use techniques to decrease the likelihood that the patient will act on his urges. Studies have suggested that testosterone-reducing drugs, called anti-androgens, are the most reliable option. Patients receive a monthly shot, and doctors monitor their testosterone levels to make sure the drug is working. Prozac, which is known to decrease libido as a side effect of its intended anti-depressant use, is a somewhat common but less effective alternative.[...]

In that article they make mention of married men:

In cases where a pedophile abused his own children, doctors ask the patient's wife—and his judge—to weigh in on whether a reunion may be possible in the future. If so, doctors often recommend family therapy as a prelude to heavily supervised father-child visits. Some patients eventually get to see their children alone.
​

Note though, just like the Op-Ed author pointed out, all the references in your article point to individuals who've offended, not to those who have the self-restraint to control acting out. We don't know anything about these individuals, because look at what happens to them when they out themselves when they ask for help.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Seriously man.. If you read that NY Times --- WHO EXACTLY is she proposing to protect and how do you identify them???

PRECISELY. If someone is a pedophile and not a child abuser, and would like professional help in order to keep his impulses under control, he'd have to be nuts to out himself.

Yep. There is no reason why someone should have to admit they are a pedophile if they are being treated for it, so long as they are under medical supervision of their doctor or specialist.This is a good article describing how it is treated these days: How do doctors treat pedophiles

How do doctors treat pedophiles?

Hormone suppressors, group therapy, and sometimes castration. Doctors do not attempt to permanently rid pedophiles of their fantasies, which are remarkably persistent. Instead, they use techniques to decrease the likelihood that the patient will act on his urges. Studies have suggested that testosterone-reducing drugs, called anti-androgens, are the most reliable option. Patients receive a monthly shot, and doctors monitor their testosterone levels to make sure the drug is working. Prozac, which is known to decrease libido as a side effect of its intended anti-depressant use, is a somewhat common but less effective alternative.[...]

In that article they make mention of married men:

In cases where a pedophile abused his own children, doctors ask the patient's wife—and his judge—to weigh in on whether a reunion may be possible in the future. If so, doctors often recommend family therapy as a prelude to heavily supervised father-child visits. Some patients eventually get to see their children alone.
​

Note though, just like the Op-Ed author pointed out, all the references in your article point to individuals who've offended, not to those who have the self-restraint to control acting out. We don't know anything about these individuals, because look at what happens to them when they out themselves when they ask for help.

As is so oftent he case with pedophiles and pedophilia, people use the terms incorrectly:

"In cases where a pedophile abused his own children,"

You're not necessarily a pedophile because yous exually abuse a child. You're a child sexual abuser, but you can be that while not being a pedophile as well.

 

[hipeter924]

Seriously man.. If you read that NY Times --- WHO EXACTLY is she proposing to protect and how do you identify them???

PRECISELY. If someone is a pedophile and not a child abuser, and would like professional help in order to keep his impulses under control, he'd have to be nuts to out himself.

Yep. There is no reason why someone should have to admit they are a pedophile if they are being treated for it, so long as they are under medical supervision of their doctor or specialist.This is a good article describing how it is treated these days: How do doctors treat pedophiles

How do doctors treat pedophiles?

Hormone suppressors, group therapy, and sometimes castration. Doctors do not attempt to permanently rid pedophiles of their fantasies, which are remarkably persistent. Instead, they use techniques to decrease the likelihood that the patient will act on his urges. Studies have suggested that testosterone-reducing drugs, called anti-androgens, are the most reliable option. Patients receive a monthly shot, and doctors monitor their testosterone levels to make sure the drug is working. Prozac, which is known to decrease libido as a side effect of its intended anti-depressant use, is a somewhat common but less effective alternative.[...]

In that article they make mention of married men:

In cases where a pedophile abused his own children, doctors ask the patient's wife—and his judge—to weigh in on whether a reunion may be possible in the future. If so, doctors often recommend family therapy as a prelude to heavily supervised father-child visits. Some patients eventually get to see their children alone.
​

Note though, just like the Op-Ed author pointed out, all the references in your article point to individuals who've offended, not to those who have the self-restraint to control acting out. We don't know anything about these individuals, because look at what happens to them when they out themselves when they ask for help.

Well, I don't think they truly have self-restraint, but it is unfortunate that society is unable to cope with living near people that could offend in their midst (even if they have the self-restraint to not do so).

 

[flacaltenn]

Seriously man.. If you read that NY Times --- WHO EXACTLY is she proposing to protect and how do you identify them???

PRECISELY. If someone is a pedophile and not a child abuser, and would like professional help in order to keep his impulses under control, he'd have to be nuts to out himself.

Well then this lady isn't thinking straight. Because someone who has only PONDERED the child abuse leading up to pedophilia needs "no additional civil rights".. That person will be treated in confidence and has no reason to come out of the closet or "out" himself. What? Are we all suppose to give him a big hug for declaring as a POTENTIAL pedophile??

In that case --- NO ONE knows what "threat to society" that individual might be anyway.. The REALITY IS that folks PROGRESS to the act of pedophilia along paths of all sort of illegal acts. These are also "PRE" pedophiles.. Does she think these child abusers ought to have "extended civil rights" and legal protections so that they can be a Carnival ride worker or a school janitor with no stigma attached?

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Having now read the daily caller article I gotta say I didn't think much of it. Didn't seem very professional to me using anonymous posted comments and speculating on why Kaplan's doing all this. Whether bad writing, or bad everything, this doesn't strike me as anything experts in the field contributed to, or had anything to do with. Seemed little more than a 'hey! look at me!' piece.

 

[Rikurzhen]

Seriously man.. If you read that NY Times --- WHO EXACTLY is she proposing to protect and how do you identify them???

PRECISELY. If someone is a pedophile and not a child abuser, and would like professional help in order to keep his impulses under control, he'd have to be nuts to out himself.

Well then this lady isn't thinking straight. Because someone who has only PONDERED the child abuse leading up to pedophilia needs "no additional civil rights".. That person will be treated in confidence and has no reason to come out of the closet or "out" himself. What? Are we all suppose to give him a big hug for declaring as a POTENTIAL pedophile??

In that case --- NO ONE knows what "threat to society" that individual might be anyway.. The REALITY IS that folks PROGRESS to the act of pedophilia along paths of all sort of illegal acts. These are also "PRE" pedophiles.. Does she think these child abusers ought to have "extended civil rights" and legal protections so that they can be a Carnival ride worker or a school janitor with no stigma attached?

I'm not sure what the laws are, but if someone goes for help don't psychologists need to report them as a threat to children?

The employment aspect is more clear - you can fire the accounting clerk in your company if you find out their pedophilia but you can't fire the employee on prozac who suffers from depression.

But she's not talking about making life cushy for child abusers. Her one example was civil commitment for identified pedophiles coming out of prison on a child abuse charge. This is an extra-judicial sentence. They're committed for mental health counseling by standards which don't apply to suicidal people. I'm of the position that if society wants to lock people away that they do it via courts, not mental health orders which don't have any standards behind them.

Most of her op-ed wasn't dealing with child abusers but non child abusers. There is no such thing as a PRE-Pedophile, there is a PRE-Child abuser. They're not the same thing. By your standards everyone who gets angry at someone is a Pre-Murderer.

 

[SmedlyButler]

So I don't think the OP will get many reply's from the board's resident liberal's supporting this ladies opinion, (not even from a dyed-in-the-wool liberal like myself) other than support for her right to have that opinion and advocate for that leprous group. It's her right to make herself a social pariah if she has the balls.

As a conservative I'll step forward and defend most of what that professor has written. I have no problem with this:

Acknowledging that pedophiles have a mental disorder, and removing the obstacles to their coming forward and seeking help, is not only the right thing to do, but it would also advance efforts to protect children from harm.​

Good for you. And I see there's a couple of other posters willing to support the rights of non-offending pedophiles. Maybe being a father of two daughters affects my judgement on this one. I wouldn't want them around somebody with a loaded weapon that I didn't know and trust and I just don't know any pedophiles and I don't think I could ever trust one enough to give him the right to be around my kids without me there as a watchdog.

Of course I would have been more impressed with your standing for certain rights for this group if you had voiced it before my post. Because of our past disagreements I'm thinking your contrariness may be just to be contrary, or did I miss something? What I'm saying is I have yet to be impressed by your integrity.

 

[MisterBeale]

Explain how you can treat a pedophile, but not a homosexual.

Pedophilia, according to the author, is a recognized mental illness. Homosexuality is not.

Pretty simple.

Sexual deviancy is sexual deviancy. Unnatural sexual activity is either a treatable illness or an non-treatable illness but an illness it is.

Not if they have different causes.

They don't. Not really.
A Review of Scientific Research on Homosexuality
What science knows about homosexuality

Homosexuality is a congenital condition much like being "left handed". Before you dismiss the analogy remember there were times in history when being left-handed (the archaic meaning of "sinister") meant you were possessed by evil. You could have been hanged, burned, stoned to death or buried alive. Having personally lived in an Arab country, I can assure you that being left-handed was something that I did my best to hide. Today we know that left handedness is the result of excess testosterone slowing the growth of the left-hemisphere in the developing fetal brain.[2] It's not a choice. It's a condition.

Ironically, homosexuality is caused much the same way as being left-handed. Instead of excess testosterone, the developing male fetus receives too little, often too late.

Researchers naturally focus on an organ in the brain called the hypothalamus because it is known to be responsible for gender preference. It is also what is called dimorphic, meaning its structure is different in males and females. There's also differences in the hypothalamus between homosexuals and heterosexuals. Recent studies of the different sections or nuclei have revealed much that was not known before. And there have also been some surprises.

With advances in laboratory technology, a specific region of the hypothalamus, called the sexually dimorphic nucleus (SDN), has been the focus of some interesting research. The SDN is the most conspicuous anatomical male/female difference in the mammalian brain. The nuclei is 3 to 8 times larger in males than in females. Another nuclei of the hypothalamus, INAH-3, reveals that heterosexual males have double the volume of both homosexual and female subjects.

 

[MisterBeale]

Explain how you can treat a pedophile, but not a homosexual.

Pedophilia, according to the author, is a recognized mental illness. Homosexuality is not.

Pretty simple.

But that is the thing that is hidden in the media. Their cause stems from the SAME DISORDER. I have researched it.

Just because they don't recognize it anymore, doesn't mean it wasn't at one time recognized as

Explain how you can treat a pedophile, but not a homosexual.

Pedophilia, according to the author, is a recognized mental illness. Homosexuality is not.

Pretty simple.

Homosexuality was considered a mental illness not that long ago.

Is it a mental illness?

It is a congenital malformation. Like downs syndrome. Just not as severe.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

So I don't think the OP will get many reply's from the board's resident liberal's supporting this ladies opinion, (not even from a dyed-in-the-wool liberal like myself) other than support for her right to have that opinion and advocate for that leprous group. It's her right to make herself a social pariah if she has the balls.

As a conservative I'll step forward and defend most of what that professor has written. I have no problem with this:

Acknowledging that pedophiles have a mental disorder, and removing the obstacles to their coming forward and seeking help, is not only the right thing to do, but it would also advance efforts to protect children from harm.​

Good for you. And I see there's a couple of other posters willing to support the rights of non-offending pedophiles. Maybe being a father of two daughters affects my judgement on this one. I wouldn't want them around somebody with a loaded weapon that I didn't know and trust and I just don't know any pedophiles and I don't think I could ever trust one enough to give him the right to be around my kids without me there as a watchdog.

Of course I would have been more impressed with your standing for certain rights for this group if you had voiced it before my post. Because of our past disagreements I'm thinking your contrariness may be just to be contrary, or did I miss something? What I'm saying is I have yet to be impressed by your integrity.

If you haven't offended, chances are no one knows you're a pedophile. Nearly everything we know about pedophiles comes from incarcerated offenders. Only some of whom are clinically pedophile, rest are 'opportunisticly pedophilic.' Meaning they're not primarily attracted to children and may be hetero or homosexual but not pedosexual in the same way a heterosexual man may have sex with another man if he gets really drunk or is in prison, but absent such situational circumstances wouldn't. As with stepparents molesting their stepchildren. Not strictly speaking a pedophile but certainly a child sexual abuser.