YES THEY ARE, at least in our society and under present conditions: I thought I'd already pointed out that a societal definition of sanity (and hence by implication 'mental health') depends upon the mores of that society. 'Unacceptable tastes' indeed: but unacceptable to whom? To that grouping of behavioural standards we term 'society'. We do not find it usual as a society for 18-year olds to have sexual feelings for their grandmothers, or to enjoy being tortured, so by the working definition above such people are not fully mentally healthy......and neither are all that many of us 'normal' folk.
I have also deliberately steered clear of the 'sin/evil' minefield, as that presupposes a set of religious conditions to which I do not subscribe.
Your other main example, homosexuality, does not fall into the same category mainly on the ground of it having a long (and often noble) history, in many different societies. That said, the other two practices are and have been deemed acceptable in other places and times: remember always that one's moral make-up is to a greater or lesser extent coloured by the society one is brought up in.
We seem to reach the same conclusion with different starting points and by different routes: namely that the greater good of children in our society outweighs the lesser good of protecting a very few individuals' 'rights'.....a compromise that has always been practised in any large grouping of humans since time immemorial.
Privacy etc.
-
Officer Dibble
Re: Privacy etc.
Ah, so you take the Einsteinian relativistic route to arrive at your conclusions, that because their behaviour in this society is beyond the pale then they must be ill or insane. I on the other hand take an absolutist view. I did not take any of the accepted norms, opinions, and prejudices of society into account and nor would I wish to since I do not share a lot of them with that society. For instance. Society says porn is dirty, pervey, sinful, exploitative and immoral. To which I say ?total bollocks? We crave visual stimulation because it is pleasurable, it makes us feel good. So, er what?s wrong with that? The rational answer is nothing. The objections are fuelled by religious hocus-pocus, bullshit, bollocks and dogma. And in recent times political correctness (or the art of calling a spade ? a garden implement with excavational issues.)
The point is there is nothing wrong with sex, or seeking sexual pleasure. That is what we are here for. To seek partners out to have sex with the ultimate aim being to propagate the species. To encourage us in this endeavour nature saw fit to make sex extremely pleasurable so we would always be thinking about our next fix. There is nothing in the slightest bit wrong with it. It is what we are designed to do and crave. This is the absolutist biological view ? the no baggage and bullshit view. The view I take on many matters.
So when I said that pedos were not ill I meant in a biological sense. In absolute terms they are not ill they are just biological variations. But because they are part of this society then you we must deem them ill? Hmmm, sounds a bit doggy to me ? shades of 1984 and ?Newthink.? But what if they had beamed down from planet Zog, where paedophilia was the accepted way of life? Would they be perfectly healthy on the pedo paradise of Zog? Then suddenly become raving mentally ill pervies on Earth? How can they be both things at the same time? What if events tuned on a sixpence and paedophilia suddenly became fashionable in our society? Would these ?ill? people suddenly and miraculously be cured?
I?m afraid we must agree to differ on this issue. I take a totally objective view - A thing is what it is no matter what societal ideas and norms are applied to it.
Officer Dibble ? in philosophical mood
The point is there is nothing wrong with sex, or seeking sexual pleasure. That is what we are here for. To seek partners out to have sex with the ultimate aim being to propagate the species. To encourage us in this endeavour nature saw fit to make sex extremely pleasurable so we would always be thinking about our next fix. There is nothing in the slightest bit wrong with it. It is what we are designed to do and crave. This is the absolutist biological view ? the no baggage and bullshit view. The view I take on many matters.
So when I said that pedos were not ill I meant in a biological sense. In absolute terms they are not ill they are just biological variations. But because they are part of this society then you we must deem them ill? Hmmm, sounds a bit doggy to me ? shades of 1984 and ?Newthink.? But what if they had beamed down from planet Zog, where paedophilia was the accepted way of life? Would they be perfectly healthy on the pedo paradise of Zog? Then suddenly become raving mentally ill pervies on Earth? How can they be both things at the same time? What if events tuned on a sixpence and paedophilia suddenly became fashionable in our society? Would these ?ill? people suddenly and miraculously be cured?
I?m afraid we must agree to differ on this issue. I take a totally objective view - A thing is what it is no matter what societal ideas and norms are applied to it.
Officer Dibble ? in philosophical mood
-
marcusallen
Re: Privacy etc.
Whilst these philosophical/social/behavioural/medical arguments are all well and good, the problem remains.
According to our Masters, the sentencing policy is designed as a deterrent and/or to protect Society. Who needs protection more and what class of offender deserves more than respectively children and their abusers. Since my solution is illegal, the logical alternative is a mandatory natural life sentence, but not in one of our nice cushy nicks: we possess various territories that would make a wonderful modernday Devil's Island and that is exactly where they should be.
I rest my case on the whole subject.
According to our Masters, the sentencing policy is designed as a deterrent and/or to protect Society. Who needs protection more and what class of offender deserves more than respectively children and their abusers. Since my solution is illegal, the logical alternative is a mandatory natural life sentence, but not in one of our nice cushy nicks: we possess various territories that would make a wonderful modernday Devil's Island and that is exactly where they should be.
I rest my case on the whole subject.
-
jj
Re: Privacy etc.
Your second solution (i.e. transporation) is also illegal.
The point here is not that measures aren't in place to deal with such persons (they are), it's that the authorities don't apply them rigorously and effectively.
If a paedophile has been found guilty of ONE offence, risking another child's safety on the dubious say-so of a Case Worker or some such is unacceptable. That should be sufficient for him (or her, there are a few) to be offered a choice: permanent incarceration until such time as a 'guaranteed' treatment is available, or release on licence after a course of castratory medication/removal of offending organ(s).
The point here is not that measures aren't in place to deal with such persons (they are), it's that the authorities don't apply them rigorously and effectively.
If a paedophile has been found guilty of ONE offence, risking another child's safety on the dubious say-so of a Case Worker or some such is unacceptable. That should be sufficient for him (or her, there are a few) to be offered a choice: permanent incarceration until such time as a 'guaranteed' treatment is available, or release on licence after a course of castratory medication/removal of offending organ(s).
-
magoo
Re: Privacy etc.
Also the abundance of titles with the "only just turned 18" theme. Not to mention the school uniform fetish scenes. I think we all agree that these are acceptable because the girls are adults pretending to be underage. BUT I think we all know that the school girl scenario is designed to appeal to fantasies which the viewers would rather not admit to. Is it acceptable for producers to indulge these fantasies? The BBFC dont think so.
Dibble if you get tired of pounding the beat and selling wank-flicks to supplement your police salary then you should consider philosophy as a career. Its got to be better than chasing those awful felines around. I am impressed with your debating skills. Just shows that The Pornshire Constabulary employs a brighter class of plod than the Met.(thats a sly dig at those chaps at Charring X if they are monitoring this forum).
Dibble if you get tired of pounding the beat and selling wank-flicks to supplement your police salary then you should consider philosophy as a career. Its got to be better than chasing those awful felines around. I am impressed with your debating skills. Just shows that The Pornshire Constabulary employs a brighter class of plod than the Met.(thats a sly dig at those chaps at Charring X if they are monitoring this forum).
-
Lizard
Re: Privacy etc.
Actually Marcus,it seem vaults and safes are! stealing money especially from the "Crown" is such a reprehendable offence
that you will almost certainly go to prison. Priorities in this
country are completely fucked up. If you fuck with the system
the system will fuck you, but if you fuck with the person, that,s your problem, if someone breaks into your home, it,s your
call and the Law will only intervene if a serious assault or some heinous crime has been commited, but steal ?20 from a post office and your going to prison.as for chris,p,s point he needs
help!his thinking on possesion of kiddie porn leads me to believe he needs therapy to discover reality from fiction.
back to me jameso............Tea
that you will almost certainly go to prison. Priorities in this
country are completely fucked up. If you fuck with the system
the system will fuck you, but if you fuck with the person, that,s your problem, if someone breaks into your home, it,s your
call and the Law will only intervene if a serious assault or some heinous crime has been commited, but steal ?20 from a post office and your going to prison.as for chris,p,s point he needs
help!his thinking on possesion of kiddie porn leads me to believe he needs therapy to discover reality from fiction.
back to me jameso............Tea
-
jj
Re: Privacy etc.
Firstly, I was unaware that Einstein had had anything at all to say on the subjecy of sanity.
Neither do I take particular account in my personal life of the norms of society, finding them, as you apparently do also, hypocritical, ill-informed and bourgeois. I merely pointed out the prevailing 'wisdom', which earns its force by being the opinion of the more powerful portions of our society.
I'm not sure your 'biological' argument will hold water: I've seen many animals in zoos with severe behavioural trauma but no apparent organic dysfunction: these are not I would assume individuals with behaviours at one or other extreme of a continuum, but rather mentally disturbed by their conditions of confinement. Ill, rather than individual. And they have been cured, by the simple expedient of improving their living conditions.
You are right, of course, to raise the '1984' analogy: while writing the last post I was irresistibly reminded of O'Brien's speech to Winston in Room 101 on the nature of reality. You, I assume, along with poor W, would 'objectively' insist on seing three fingers held up, and not the four that all 'sane' Party members would see. As in this novel, yes, the 'insane' can miraculously become 'sane', according to the prevailing zeitgeist: I'm rather afraid objectivity is an unattainable ideal, except in certain areas of pure maths......if a nation were to decree that from now on the speed of light were to be 5 m.p.h, they would rapidly be proved wrong by the Laws of Physics.
Unfortunately or oherwise, apodictic certainty is not a frequent end-product of human affairs.
Neither do I take particular account in my personal life of the norms of society, finding them, as you apparently do also, hypocritical, ill-informed and bourgeois. I merely pointed out the prevailing 'wisdom', which earns its force by being the opinion of the more powerful portions of our society.
I'm not sure your 'biological' argument will hold water: I've seen many animals in zoos with severe behavioural trauma but no apparent organic dysfunction: these are not I would assume individuals with behaviours at one or other extreme of a continuum, but rather mentally disturbed by their conditions of confinement. Ill, rather than individual. And they have been cured, by the simple expedient of improving their living conditions.
You are right, of course, to raise the '1984' analogy: while writing the last post I was irresistibly reminded of O'Brien's speech to Winston in Room 101 on the nature of reality. You, I assume, along with poor W, would 'objectively' insist on seing three fingers held up, and not the four that all 'sane' Party members would see. As in this novel, yes, the 'insane' can miraculously become 'sane', according to the prevailing zeitgeist: I'm rather afraid objectivity is an unattainable ideal, except in certain areas of pure maths......if a nation were to decree that from now on the speed of light were to be 5 m.p.h, they would rapidly be proved wrong by the Laws of Physics.
Unfortunately or oherwise, apodictic certainty is not a frequent end-product of human affairs.
-
magoo
Re: Privacy etc.
Chemical castration might be a humane solution. Give them drugs that deaden all sexual urges. Not sure if it would work.
On a slightly different note. I was reading a history book which contained some Court Reports from 1900 of cases heard at Durham Assizes during one week. A man raped a seven year old girl and unbelievably the Court accepted that it was the girls fault for leading him on, he got a slapped wrist. On the same day an 18 year old lad was sentenced to hang for stealing a handkerchief from a doctor (stealing from a rich person presumably being more serious than stealing from a poor person), a bloke was also transported to Australia in 1890? for pinching a chicken by the same Judge. Reading through the list of persons sentenced that week I was amazed at how many petty thieves were hanged. Child abuse on the other hand was punished very lightly. In fact in many small communities it was common for the eldest daughter to have to have sex with her dad if her mother was pregnant. So I think society is definately better now despite all of the shit we read in the tabloids.
On a slightly different note. I was reading a history book which contained some Court Reports from 1900 of cases heard at Durham Assizes during one week. A man raped a seven year old girl and unbelievably the Court accepted that it was the girls fault for leading him on, he got a slapped wrist. On the same day an 18 year old lad was sentenced to hang for stealing a handkerchief from a doctor (stealing from a rich person presumably being more serious than stealing from a poor person), a bloke was also transported to Australia in 1890? for pinching a chicken by the same Judge. Reading through the list of persons sentenced that week I was amazed at how many petty thieves were hanged. Child abuse on the other hand was punished very lightly. In fact in many small communities it was common for the eldest daughter to have to have sex with her dad if her mother was pregnant. So I think society is definately better now despite all of the shit we read in the tabloids.
-
buttsie
o/t Re: Privacy etc.
Can't we wait till Shaggy & Scooby Doo get it on before banning 'animated'
sex lol
cheers
B...OZ
sex lol
cheers
B...OZ