Re: The pedophile’s last lie
Jerry
news:o820d4h11ps41bj9k...@4ax.com:
>
>
> The pedophile’s last lie
>
> http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/editorials/archives/2008/09/07/2003422
508
>
> Many pedophiles claim their crime is restricted to viewing Internet
> images, but new research shatters that myth
>
> By Phillipa Ibbotson
> THE GUARDIAN, LONDON
> Sunday, Sep 07, 2008, Page 9
>
> Last month, disgraced glam rocker Gary Glitter was deported from
> Vietnam after serving a two-and-a-half year prison sentence for
> sexually abusing young girls. He had fled Britain nine years earlier
> after receiving a two-month sentence for possessing child pornography.
>
> Despite the length and breadth of his subsequent offending career, the
> apparent ineffectiveness of his brief first sentence hardly rated a
> mention. Yet just days after his deportation, Scotland Yard issued a
> warning. The problem of child abuse is a far greater threat to society
> than first thought, it said, with “huge” numbers of pedophiles now
> scouring the Internet.
>
> Since 1998, Internet crime involving sexual exploitation of children
> has risen by more than 400 percent; downloading, possessing and
> trading or distributing child pornography has also grown rapidly. Ever
> more sophisticated technologies have facilitated illegal online
> activities, making it easier to avoid detection.
>
> As a result, illegal material can move faster and in significantly
> greater quantities than before. And it is a highly profitable
> business: commercial child pornography was estimated two years ago to
> be a US$20 billion industry worldwide.
>
> Yet it is not only the quantity that is disturbing. There is also the
> increasingly extreme nature of the material, as reported in the
> Internet Watch Foundation’s (IWF) study earlier this year.
>
> Detectives for the London-based Child Exploitation Online Protection
> center are uncovering evidence that pedophiles are concentrating more
> on pre-verbal victims. Ernie Allen, president of the National Center
> for Missing & Exploited Children in the US, said recently that child
> pornography has become “a global crisis.”
>
> Child sex offenders are usually habitual fantasists. They are prone to
> distorted thinking; dissembling and deceit go with the territory. And
> it seems they are particularly skilled at disowning and evading
> responsibility, a trait prevalent among sexual abusers generally.
>
> Partly as a result of this, less is known about online child
> pornographers and their treatment than almost any other group of
> offenders. And even less is known about the correlation between the
> use of pornography and hands-on offenses. So despite some recognized
> advances in policing and containment recently, this lack of empirical
> knowledge is thwarting the professionals who seek to tackle the
> problem. The damage, meanwhile, continues to escalate.
>
> Psychologists Michael Bourke and Andres Hernandez conducted a study
> two years ago at a federal correctional institution in the US, in
> which they compared two groups of men in a voluntary treatment program
> for sex offenders. All 155 had been sentenced for the possession,
> distribution or receipt of child-abuse images. Only 40 of them were
> known to have committed any hands-on sexual offenses previously,
> averaging 1.88 victims each. The others claimed never to have
> committed such offenses: Their activities, they said, had been
> restricted to viewing images.
>
> But after participating in an 18-month therapeutic program, a very
> different picture emerged. It was a picture that not only belied the
> normal, law-abiding lives depicted by most of these men prior to their
> arrest, but one that also contrasted with the frequent assertion that
> such offenders are “only” involved with images.
>
> It emerged that the number of men admitting to hands-on sexual abuse
> increased from 40 to 131. Their average number of disclosed victims
> rose to 13.56 (8.7 for the 115 men who had previously denied any
> offenses). Overall, the number of admitted contact sexual offenses
> increased by 2,369 percent.
>
> Far from being innocent or sexually “curious” bystanders whose
> interest was reserved to Internet images, the vast majority of these
> men emerged as hands-on offenders with longstanding sexual interest.
> Not only were they significantly likely to have sexually abused more
> than one child, they were also likely to have experimented with both
> genders, and a variety of age groups.
>
> The other 24 men were offered a lie detector test; some refused. Only
> two of these men passed, both of whom admitted that with continued
> opportunity and online access they would have been in danger of
> molesting a child.
>
> Perhaps this should not surprise us. Among other things, online
> communities provide marginalized individuals with a feeling of
> solidarity, while at the same time maintaining the illusion of
> anonymity. Fertile grounds, you might think, for the awakening of any
> dormant or repressed sexual fantasies. Indeed, perhaps the act of
> repression creates its own vulnerability, rendering such individuals
> more susceptible to external triggers.
>
> It would be rash to conclude that the Internet causes contact sexual
> crimes. But the research puts paid to the idea that the desire to view
> images is easily distinguishable from the desire to act them out. And
> they also corroborate prior findings: The manifestations of deviant
> sexual arousal are seldom limited to fantasy. It is opportunity more
> than anything that dictates how many Internet offenders also rape and
> molest children.
>
> What is beyond doubt is the harm caused. Child abuse images dehumanize
> children and desensitize offenders, and child/adult sexuality is
> normalized in the process. Yet such a profitable business will not
> suffer exposure easily, nor welcome scrutiny.
>
> The above survey was among the first of its kind in the US, and
> doubtless proved discomfiting to many. It has yet to be published.
> Those experts who have seen it say privately that it could have
> enormous implications, both for law enforcement and public safety.
>
> What is becoming apparent is that the Internet has opened the way for
> new types of offending. The real issue is not whether viewing these
> images will make someone a pedophile — a label liable to vast
> misunderstandings. The real danger is that those who do so will be
> encouraged to reoffend — and that the proliferation of online
> child-abuse images will dramatically increase the incidence of child
> abuse.
>
> As the IWF has stated, there is urgent need for “a coordinated global
> attack on these websites.”
>
> This is undoubtedly so. But as Bourke and Hernandez’ report shows, our
> lack of awareness in this area is very dangerous. Particularly, it
> seems, when it comes to our knowledge of sex offenders. If nothing
> else, Glitter’s case shows that his initial prison sentence achieved
> little apart from delaying the next onslaught. Clearly a more
> enlightened approach toward the treatment of victims and offenders is
> not only long overdue but vital.
>
> This dark underbelly of society has fed on ignorance for too long. It
> is only through addressing why these things happen, as well as how to
> stop them, that we might shrink its appetite. This untold damage needs
> telling.
Jesus, Jesus, what a brilliant argumentation. It begins with Glitter the
raper, then another absurd analysis, and it finish again with Glitter
the rocker raper. Very academic, it was surely written for one of the
very clever journalists that leave the aulas these days. But tell me,
Brandon, trying to get valid results and sincere answers from a group of
pursued, lobbied, depressed convicts, is not a contradiction itself? a
conceptual, analytic, psychologic and social contradiction? Ahh,
society, shining society, you're allways transcending yourself.
> This dark underbelly of society has fed on ignorance for too long.
Yahooo, what's this, poetry? I liked it, very lyric, indeed. But it's
not a little cynical if you presume to know everything about "pedos" at
the same time you regret about your, mmm... "ignorance". What are you
saying, Brandon, I can't get it. Ignorance, you say? marginalize,
anonimity, volunteers,... come on, come on, Brandon, your breathe lies
and sweat hypocrisy. But I'm here, Brandon, I don't have to cite what
others say about me. I know a lot more about me than you. And I'm a
pedo, you can swear that.
Nomen Nescio
> Brandon D Cartwright <u...@example.net> wrote
innews:o820d4h11ps41bj9k...@4ax.com:
How interesting, a Paedophile from Finland posting with translation
software. Hey Sven or Lars or shite for brains, if you cannot speakee
the language, don't waste the bandwidth. His reply to NB in prettyboy?
"another improvised shrink, greaty!"
LOL!! That's the translation softwares version of *arm chair
psychiatrist*
greaty??
"You will never
find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy" -- Obi-Wan Kenobi.
k00kologist #24 AUK.
Owner and trainer of Emerson Wainwright
Jerry
> How interesting, a Paedophile from Finland posting with translation
yeah, I spend my time between Helsinki, Finland, and Ontario, Canada.
You must be however a great hacker, buahahahaha
> software. Hey Sven or Lars or shite for brains, if you cannot speakee
> the language, don't waste the bandwidth. His reply to NB in
prettyboy?
>
> "another improvised shrink, greaty!"
>
> LOL!! That's the translation softwares version of *arm chair
> psychiatrist*
I see you understand your own idiom, great(y)! It's more than I could
expect from a stupid motherfucker like you
> greaty??
>
> "You will never
> find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy" -- Obi-Wan Kenobi.
the dark side is a cozy place, don't you think?