The Paedophile Next Door

Mr.McLovin

http://www.independent.ie/world-news/europe/i-have-got-a-problem-i-need-help-paedophile-to-out-himself-in-new-channel-4-documentary-30769200.html

Channel 4's The Paedophile Next Door will feature 39-year-old Eddie admitting openly on camera that he has been sexually attracted to girls as young as four since he was in his 20s, but insisting has never committed a crime.

The programme looks at so-called "virtuous paedophiles" and suggests radical changes are needed to child protection that include treatment and therapy for those who come forward despite never having committed any sex offences.

Is there anyway of treating these people that works?

The One Doctor

Is there anyway of treating these people that works?

Pedophilia is a mental illness, so yes there is. However, the stigma is so huge (justifiably so) that they'll probably never get the treatment and therapy they need.

A vicious circle.

Galwayguy35

Chemical castration for those that seek help, might help stop the unnatural urges they have.

As for those that do abuse kids, lock em up for good, society doesn't need scum like that out and about.

wretcheddomain

Public hanging, through use of a nappy.

ScumLord

The One Doctor wrote: »

Pedophilia is a mental illness,

Is it a mental illness? Or is it just an abnormal sexual orientation? It may be something as fundamentally ingrained in their psyche as being hetero or homosexual.

I don't know either way though.

Calling it an illness implies it can be treated and possibly cured, if it's like the sexuality of hetero or homosexual then maybe it's not something that can be cured and is just a fundamental part of who they are, meaning they'll always be a danger no matter how much treatment they get.

I don't know how society can deal with a problem like that. Peadophiles won't want to put themselves forward for persecution, especially if treatment won't do anything but put them under constant scrutiny. But some form of ongoing treatment must surely be better than trying to control urges without some form of treatment.

January

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

Chemical castration for those that seek help, might help stop the unnatural urges they have.

As for those that do abuse kids, lock em up for good, society doesn't need scum like that out and about.

And what about those that view/distribute child porn? Are they not doing anything wrong? Chemical castration won't stop them doing that.

AnonoBoy

January wrote: »

And what about those that view/distribute child porn? Are they not doing anything wrong? Chemical castration won't stop them doing that.

I don't see how you could think he was saying that people who distribute child porn aren't doing anything wrong.

wp_rathead

wretcheddomain wrote: »

Public hanging, through use of a nappy.

for just admitting to being a paedophile? Even if you never acted upon the urges?

Fuhrer

wretcheddomain wrote: »

Public hanging, through use of a nappy.

How does that work?

January

AnonoBoy wrote: »

I don't see how you could think he was saying that people who distribute child porn aren't doing anything wrong.

I didn't actually, he only touched on the subject of paedophiles acting on their urges, which I presumed to mean abusing children physically. I was asking what he thought about people who didn't specifically 'act' on their urges but still viewed child porn or distributed it.

wp_rathead

January wrote: »

I didn't actually, he only touched on the subject of paedophiles acting on their urges, which I presumed to mean abusing children physically. I was asking what he thought about people who didn't specifically 'act' on their urges but still viewed child porn or distributed it.

The lengths one must go through to attain child porn can most definitely be categorised as "acting on their urges"

0byme75341jo28

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

Chemical castration for those that seek help, might help stop the unnatural urges they have.

As for those that do abuse kids, lock em up for good, society doesn't need scum like that out and about.

I'm not entirely sure these urges are unnatural, there seems to always have been pedophiles in the world. Also, why would they ever seek help if they'd be forced into being chemically castrated if they did?

Personally, I would prefer to have a situation where pedophiles were encouraged to seek help before committing an offence, and offered therapy/other forms of treatment, as opposed to the current situation where we wait for them to commit an offence and then lock them up.

Do most people even realise that not all pedophiles are child abusers? The former isn't illegal, the latter is.

seamus

ScumLord wrote: »

Is it a mental illness? Or is it just an abnormal sexual orientation? It may be something as fundamentally ingrained in their psyche as being hetero or homosexual.

Possibly, though in my view I would argue that any state of mind where one would willingly harm oneself or another could/should be classed as a mental illness.

Even more so, where many paedophiles who have been caught try to argue that their "relationships" with the children are loving or consensual, that to me only strengthens the idea of it being a mental illness, such is the level of delusion some of them experience.

It's still a tough one though. Can it be treated? Who knows. Voluntary chemical (or actual) castration hasn't been proven effective in any case. I'm sure there are drugs that can suppress libido, but then we know so little about about it, they may not work either. It may not be a purely sexual thing.

As you say, this is a really difficult one for society to deal with. Those who don't act on their urges are never going to come forward and put their hands up or voluntarily present themselves for treatment. We can attempt treatment on those who got caught, but by implication they represent a specific subset of paedophiles - those who have acted on their urges. So treatment on them may not be appropriate for those who can control themselves.

Buona Fortuna

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

Chemical castration for those that seek help, might help stop the unnatural urges they have.

As for those that do abuse kids, lock em up for good, society doesn't need scum like that out and about.

And for female child abusers?

seamus

wprathead wrote: »

The lengths one must go through to attain child porn can most definitely be categorised as "acting on their urges"

That of course opens up a whole other can of worms.

Obviously porn depicting actual children is and should be illegal.

But what about animated or descriptive? A lot of Hentai skirts dangerously close to being classed as child porn in Ireland. But ultimately even if it is children being depicted and most of us find it physically repulsive, is a paedophile who exclusively looks at this kind of porn still "acting on their urges"?

Galwayguy35

January wrote: »

I didn't actually, he only touched on the subject of paedophiles acting on their urges, which I presumed to mean abusing children physically. I was asking what he thought about people who didn't specifically 'act' on their urges but still viewed child porn or distributed it.

Obviously they should be hauled before the courts, are you suggesting I don't think it's a serious crime viewing that filth?

Its Only Ray Parlour

Buona Fortuna wrote: »

And for female child abusers?

Cement their vaginas shut.

Galwayguy35

Buona Fortuna wrote: »

And for female child abusers?

TBH I have no answer for that.

wretcheddomain

Fuhrer wrote: »

How does that work?

As the Fuhrer, I'm surprised you're even asking that. :pac:

shruikan2553

People often mistake paedophiles and child abusers. I am attracted to women but people don't assume I'm going to sexualy assault them outside of a few crazys on tumblr. Of course you have to account I can have a consensual relationship with my attraction but I am able to control my urges.

I don't know if it is a sexual orientation, a fetish or a mental illness but I would rather see people be helped instead of waiting to do something about it before trying to stop them.

Buona Fortuna

Its Only Ray Parlour wrote: »

Cement their vaginas shut.

That's creative but I don't think it would have any positive effects.

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

TBH I have no answer for that.

Trouble is the chemical castration thing is inequitous.

You have a penis - bingo. Its almost the way laws work and maybe that penis wasn't material in the abuse. Unfortunately there are all sorts of things you can do without one,or without a functioning one.

I'm not making a plea for child abusers, I just think it needs more thought.

SparkySpitfire

ScumLord wrote: »

Is it a mental illness? Or is it just an abnormal sexual orientation? It may be something as fundamentally ingrained in their psyche as being hetero or homosexual.

I don't know either way though.

Calling it an illness implies it can be treated and possibly cured, if it's like the sexuality of hetero or homosexual then maybe it's not something that can be cured and is just a fundamental part of who they are, meaning they'll always be a danger no matter how much treatment they get.

I don't know how society can deal with a problem like that. Peadophiles won't want to put themselves forward for persecution, especially if treatment won't do anything but put them under constant scrutiny. But some form of ongoing treatment must surely be better than trying to control urges without some form of treatment.

Its in the DSM and the ICD as a mental disorder so yes.

Galwayguy35

Buona Fortuna wrote: »

That's creative but I don't think it would have any positive effects.



Trouble is the chemical castration thing is inequitous.

You have a penis - bingo. Its almost the way laws work and maybe that penis wasn't material in the abuse. Unfortunately there are all sorts of things you can do without one,or without a functioning one.

I'm not making a plea for child abusers, I just think it needs more thought.

Well it could kill the urges in men, I'm not saying people should have it done against their will but if someone was serious about getting help they might consider it.

DoYouEvenLift

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

Well it could kill the urges in men, I'm not saying people should have it done against their will but if someone was serious about getting help they might consider it.

So what about the urges of women? Male paedophiles get their balls cut and female paedophiles get...?


And what happens when the males experience all the negative side effects of having no testosterone?

Buona Fortuna

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

Well it could kill the urges in men, I'm not saying people should have it done against their will but if someone was serious about getting help they might consider it.

OK, but it wouldn't stop the people that just produce the images, and all the other stuff that doesn't involve a penis.

Also I'm quite uncomfortable with the whole chemical castration thing - I don't know much about other than what I've read about Alan Turing http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Turing

Another poorly framed thought:o. Ever had too much to drink and not been able to ..... you've still had the urge to.

Galwayguy35

DoYouEvenLift wrote: »

So what about the urges of women? Male paedophiles get their balls cut and female paedophiles get...?


And what happens when the males experience all the negative side effects of having no testosterone?

As I said in post 18 I don't know about female paedophiles, also I wasn't suggesting people have it done against their will.

What negative affects?

Galwayguy35

Buona Fortuna wrote: »

OK, but it wouldn't stop the people that just produce the images, and all the other stuff that doesn't involve a penis.

Also I'm quite uncomfortable with the whole chemical castration thing - I don't know much about other than what I've read about Alan Turing http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Turing

Another poorly framed thought:o. Ever had too much to drink and not been able to ..... you've still had the urge to.

Yeah brewers droop:p

floggg

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

Chemical castration for those that seek help, might help stop the unnatural urges they have.

As for those that do abuse kids, lock em up for good, society doesn't need scum like that out and about.

Ignorant ridiculous nonsense.

Somebody who has never offended and voluntarily seeks help to ensure they never do shouldn't be punished in anyway.

Ignorant attitudes like this only serve to increase the risk of people offending, as they are too scared to come forward and seek help.

I don't know much about them but I believe there are treatments available which can be effective. It's probably a very under developed area due to the lack of willing participants.

floggg

seamus wrote: »

Possibly, though in my view I would argue that any state of mind where one would willingly harm oneself or another could/should be classed as a mental illness.

.

So being angry is a mental disorder then? Sheesh.

Galwayguy35

floggg wrote: »

Ignorant ridiculous nonsense.

Somebody who has never offended and voluntarily seeks help to ensure they never do shouldn't be punished in anyway.

Ignorant attitudes like this only serve to increase the risk of people offending, as they are too scared to come forward and seek help.

I don't know much about them but I believe there are treatments available which can be effective. It's probably a very under developed area due to the lack of willing participants.

Did you even read the thread?

I didn't say people should be forced to do anything.

As for the bit I highlighted, bullsh1t statement.

DoYouEvenLift

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

As I said in post 18 I don't know about female paedophiles, also I wasn't suggesting people have it done against their will.

What negative affects?

If you're a man you should already know the effects of men having low testosterone so you can know what to lookout for yourself just in case you ever needed to go for medical help, but it can cause depression, decrease in motivation, decreased sense of well being, negative effects on memory and concentration, fragile bones. With no testosterone production I'd imagine these and the rest of the possible efects would be even worse.

floggg

shruikan2553 wrote: »

I don't know if it is a sexual orientation, a fetish or a mental illness but I would rather see people be helped instead of waiting to do something about it before trying to stop them.

Unfortunately that's the General attitude of society towards crime - punish crime but do nothing constructive to stop it.

The "tough on crime" crowd love to call for castration, lengthy jail sentences and execution, but seem to care little that those approaches are ineffective to prevent or deter crime and cost way more than so called softer methods (education, early intervention, rehabilitation, restorative justice etc) which are proven to reduce crime and save in the long run.

Who needs lower crime rates, when draconian state sanctioned punishment of other human beings makes you feel so good about yourself.

Galwayguy35

DoYouEvenLift wrote: »

If you're a man you should already know the effects of men having low testosterone so you can know what to lookout for yourself just in case you ever needed to go for medical help, but it can cause depression, decrease in motivation, decreased sense of well being, negative effects on memory and concentration, fragile bones. With no testosterone production I'd imagine these and the rest of the possible efects would be even worse.

Is it not worth the risk if it gets rid of the sexual feelings towards young kids?

jamesbere

Is this the sequel to a girl next door

twowheelsonly

Personally I believe that it's a 'state of mind' much the same as Hetero/Homosexuality, even bestiality!! Some people would find bondage/bdsm/swinging etc a turn on while others think it's depraved. Some people would find them a turn on but never act on them. Both men and women can have rape fantasies but never act on them.
I peronally think that the amount of paedophiles out there is huge but thankfully most never act on their urges and rape anybody. I also don't believe that their is a 'solution', no more than there is for homo or hetero sexuality.

seamus wrote: »

Possibly, though in my view I would argue that any state of mind where one would willingly harm oneself or another could/should be classed as a mental illness.

Even more so, where many paedophiles homosexuals who have been caught try to argue that their "relationships" with the children their partner are loving or consensual, that to me only strengthens the idea of it being a mental illness, such is the level of delusion some of them experience.

It's still a tough one though. Can it be treated? Who knows. Voluntary chemical (or actual) castration hasn't been proven effective in any case. I'm sure there are drugs that can suppress libido, but then we know so little about about it, they may not work either. It may not be a purely sexual thing.

As you say, this is a really difficult one for society to deal with......

As you say, it's a hard one to judge. Go back a short few years and your 'corrected' statement above would have been in vogue.

shruikan2553 wrote: »

People often mistake paedophiles and child abusers. I am attracted to women but people don't assume I'm going to sexualy assault them outside of a few crazys on tumblr. Of course you have to account I can have a consensual relationship with my attraction but I am able to control my urges.

I don't know if it is a sexual orientation, a fetish or a mental illness but I would rather see people be helped instead of waiting to do something about it before trying to stop them.

This is it exactly - in reality every man is a potential rapist, thankfully most don't actually act on that threat.

SparkySpitfire wrote: »

Its in the DSM and the ICD as a mental disorder so yes.

Somebody said so so therefore it is?

Not conforming to the norm in every circumstance shouldn't mean classification as a mental illness. What's the criteria that they use? Abnormal behaviour or abnormal thoughts?

SparkySpitfire

Somebody said so so therefore it is?

Not conforming to the norm in every circumstance shouldn't mean classification as a mental illness. What's the criteria that they use? Abnormal behaviour or abnormal thoughts?

A lot of medical and psychiatric professionals with more knowledge of the subject than you or I.

EuropeanSon

SparkySpitfire wrote: »

A lot of medical and psychiatric professionals with more knowledge of the subject than you or I.

The same argument was very likely used when homosexuality was labeled a mental illness.

I don't know the answer, but I do know the explanation above is insufficient.

twowheelsonly

SparkySpitfire wrote: »

A lot of medical and psychiatric professionals with more knowledge of the subject than you or I.

That's very true, but the same people will readily explain that they don't actually understand how the mind works and that it's not an exact science. They can't for instance explain why you should be hetero-sexual and your brother be homo-sexual.
My point is that classing something as a Mental Illness or a disease because you don't understand it doesn't mean that it actually is!!

floggg

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

TBH I have no answer for that.

Shows how under-developed unsound your thinking is if you can't even begin to fathom how it would be applied to a woman in the same position.

Laura Palmer

DoYouEvenLift wrote: »

So what about the urges of women? Male paedophiles get their balls cut and female paedophiles get...?

Chemical castration = balls being cut off? (Not that I agree with either).

I think (being idealistic) help should be offered to those who make the unenviable discovery that they're sexually attracted to children. They'd probably have to be "secret" clinics though.

Semele

EuropeanSon wrote: »

The same argument was very likely used when homosexuality was labeled a mental illness.

I don't know the answer, but I do know the explanation above is insufficient.

Exactly. I'm not rabidly anti-psychiatry or anything, but if you ever look more fully into how diagnoses are arrived at it is in a large part through consensus. Admittedly the consensus of people experienced in the field, but heavily based also in the social norms of their culture. A lot of diagnoses either implicitly or explicitly reference ignorance of, or breaking, social norms as one of their criteria.

Back on topic, I remember a few years ago reading about an initiative (somewhere in Europe I can't remember) to provide therapy to people with paedophiliac urges before they reached the point of acting on them. It was phone based and anonymous in order to get around the stigma and fear people would have of coming forward and admitting to illegal acts, and it apparently had a huge uptake, much higher than they expected. It seems that many more people have those feelings than ever act upon them and for the vast majority those feelings are terribly unwanted.

I don't condone abuse of any sort, but it must be a lonely and terrifying thing to have feelings that disgust you and to feel that you would be shunned if anyone knew, and that this could stop you getting help.

As far as I recall, the adverts for the counselling service had said something like "Your thoughts are not your responsibility. Your actions are. If you are troubled by etc etc etc contact us in strict confidentiality". It was a great scheme and it should be rolled out more widely.

CrazyRabbit

What most people here seem to be forgetting is that we're not just talking about adults. Generally speaking, I'd say that paedophiles develop their 'attraction' when they themselves are just young teens or even younger.

So we're actually talking about children being able to get help before they get older and act on those feelings.

Imagine being 12/13 years old and realising that you are attracted to much younger boys/girls? Puberty is hard enough as it is, but can you imagine just how much worse it would be in that case? And there's currently no safe way to talk to anyone who can help you without judging or punishing you. Nightmare.

I strongly believe that those who advocate exceptionally hard punishments for paedophiles actually cause harm to children by making it terrifying for paedophiles to seek help before they offend.

ALiasEX

Not All Pedophiles Have Mental Disorder, American Psychiatric Association Says In New DSM

Galwayguy35

floggg wrote: »

Shows how under-developed unsound your thinking is if you can't even begin to fathom how it would be applied to a woman in the same position.

You are a great man for the personal insults aren't ya, ironic seeing as you added nothing to the thread since you started posting on it. other than have a go at me.

RobertKK

I think it is no different in terms of chemical reactions in the the body to that of a person loving the opposites sex, same sex, an older person and then we come to the younger person.
But the only difference is it is unacceptable because the person they are attracted to is too young, not fully developed, not strong enough in many ways to stop it and that is what makes it so wrong. We have an age of consent for a reason.

Though in the past it seems to have been acceptable given the most famous example is of the the Prophet Mohammed who married a 9 year old after dating her since the age of 6.

seamus

twowheelsonly wrote: »

As you say, it's a hard one to judge. Go back a short few years and your 'corrected' statement above would have been in vogue.

Yes, absolutely. But there is a more definite line now in terms of consent and the ability to do so.

It's a very different barrier which suggests that children are capable of providing consent (for anything), and also opens a whole can of worms where a severely drunk or disabled person is equally capable of "consenting".

I guess my "mental illness" comment was directed more at active paedophiles. We all get urges every now and again to hurt people, which we manage to control and suppress until we've calmed down. That doesn't make us mentally ill.
However, consistently struggling with urges to hurt people and/or failing to keep them in check may indicate a mental illness that the individual needs help dealing with.

floggg

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

You are a great man for the personal insults aren't ya, ironic seeing as you added nothing to the thread since you started posting on it. other than have a go at me.

That's not a personal insult. It's commenting on your half formed idea which I find morally repugnant.

kjl

I would consider myself to be a straight male, but I do get turned on by watching transexual porn. There are plenty of transexual escorts in Ireland that I could live out this fantasy with but I never do. I know deep down I would not enjoy it and the only reason I enjoy the porn is because it's taboo.

I think it can be possible for someone to watch the child porn but never consider acting on it, but obviously the making of the porn is where the serious problem lies. However I pose a moral question for you. Would it be ok to watch CP if it was made digitally and no child was involved in the act? Snuff movies are illegal but a movie where you pretend to kill someone isn't, where do you draw the line?

Everyone loves Game of Thrones but in the books Daenerys was only 11 years old when she was raped by Drogo and it's pretty graphic. Is this considered child porn being that it depicts sex with an underage girl.

Also what defines pedofile? Is someone who is attracted to teenage girls considered the same as someone who is attracted to 4 year olds. 100 years ago it would be considered normal enough for a man in his 30 to marry a young girl of 14 or 15.

The One Doctor

RobertKK wrote: »

I think it is no different in terms of chemical reactions in the the body to that of a person loving the opposites sex, same sex, an older person and then we come to the younger person.
But the only difference is it is unacceptable because the person they are attracted to is too young, not fully developed, not strong enough in many ways to stop it and that is what makes it so wrong. We have an age of consent for a reason.

Though in the past it seems to have been acceptable given the most famous example is of the the Prophet Mohammed who married a 9 year old after dating her since the age of 6.

It was accepted for thousand of years. The Romans pimped out child prostitutes, as did the ancient Greeks. One of the reasons was that there was no legal structure in place to class pedophilia as a crime as it was so accepted - equivalent to classing drinking alcohol as a crime here. 'A crime to have a drink? Sure everyone does it!'

It's only really in the last 100 years or less the pedophilia has become an actual crime, mainly due to the increased public awareness of the plight of children, especially those who were orphaned. This coincided with the rise of children's charities like Barnardo's (a bad example due to Doctor Barnardo's impulse to kidnap children, rip their clothes, take photos and use them as an advertising campaign for more funds. He was accused of 84 counts of kidnap but was never convicted. He also sold plenty of children to Canadian farms for child labour, ironically).

Gradually children became protected by law, which got rid of child labour, that backbone of the British Empire. Eventually, the age of consent law was brought in, but that still varies by country to this day with Spain having an AOC of 13 with most of the rest choosing 16. However, Spain's low AOC only applies to teenagers, i.e, an adult having sex with a 13 year old would still be charged with sexual abuse.

nozzferrahhtoo

Mr.McLovin wrote: »

Is there anyway of treating these people that works?

Hard to say to be honest. I am not sure if we have anyone on boards.ie who is actively working in the field with such people who could inform us better than I can.

I did read some reference, that I did not since follow up, in another thread that it has been shown that Child Pornography made by artists (cartoon, painted, whatever) has a negative effect on the desire of pedophiles to actually actively engage in pedophilia.

I can imagine, were this shown to be true, that a massive ethical and moral debate will ensue related to this that will be highly divisive. Currently in some country laws the text on Child Pornography, if I recall correctly, includes even representations of children in sexual acts. So cartoon or porn of that nature would fall under this as child pornography. So if cartoon child porn or other representations of it artificially, WERE shown to be an effective treatment, much discussion would ensue.

René Descartes had a deep passion for cross-eyed women which he reports having lost entirely when he traced the root of it and I have heard many similar stories. If that was shown to be true then tracing the roots of pedophilia with pedophiles may be beneficial. No idea if this is actively done now. But other therapies and rehabilitation have not been a total failure either.

The main issue for treatment is diagnosis of causes. The common Joe on the street when reading about a person who molested a child has a single reaction to it. But the reality is that is just the result, while the causes are diverse. Some people are sexual attracted to children. Some people are not but get off on the dominance and power. Others get off on the taboo. Others just want to destroy innocence, cause pain, or watch the world burn.

And clearly one can not treat a condition without knowing the cause, and if three people present with the same symptom.... such as having molested a child sexually.... that in no way informs us of the cause..... in much the same way as if you present to your doctor with symptoms of fainting.... you might LACK something (such as a nutrient or vitamin) or HAVE something (such as an infection or parasite) and clearly the treatment will vary wildly depending on the diagnosis.

The same is true of pedophilia. HOW we treat a pedophile and how successful that treatment will be, will clearly hang from what condition it is they actually _have_ and the treatment of one group of them will not transfer to another. There will be no one catch all "treatment" for pedophilia quite likely.

That said however we need to separate in our minds the vast difference between someone actively attracted to children.... and someone who acts on those feelings.

Because now most people, I fear, also evidenced by some of the posts on this thread, will respond and react to either category pretty much the same..... while I feel our society would be a better one if people with such an attraction were openly able to admit it and seek assistance with that.... rather than hide in fear or loathing and retribution.... with such feelings simmering and growing over time.

Eden Beautiful Butcher wrote: »

Do most people even realise that not all pedophiles are child abusers? The former isn't illegal, the latter is.

Indeed and I wonder, given the social and other stigma from admitting it, just how many people in the world HAVE such an attraction but never act on it and never express it. It might be not just more than we think or suspect, but massively so. Hard to construct a comprehensive study on this with good results in the current environment though.

The One Doctor

floggg wrote: »

That's not a personal insult. It's commenting on your half formed idea which I find morally repugnant.

But do you think chemical castration of males is morally repugnant? If so, how would you suggest doing the same to a female who has sexually abused children? They do exist, you know. About one third of child sexual abuse is carried out by women.

So how would you stop female sexual abusers from committing abuse crimes? Or do you believe that women are not capable of such obscenities and think we should turn a blind eye? The poster suggested a way that you might find disturbing, but he has a valid point.