The late reply is to allow for more thought over what I said as well as giving myself time to absorb the response. I do not believe in rushed thinking.
I am a bit confused by your post, as I have not used the word pedophile in my article. Would you please clarify?
This is purely my fault. I did not make it clear that I was refering to both articles pertaining to the new law.
Ahh yes, people to tend to find it hard to follow my train of thought. I tend not to think on a linear path, therefore you sometimes have to read what I write twice to understand specific points, or realize that I use quotes after a reference.
It doesn't take a genius to figure that out, however I guess it isn't what's considered a normal train of thought, so unless you take what I say seriously or with a clear head I do not blame you for having difficulty for following the lack of pattern.
Bella Online is a website written for women by women, women sharing helpful tips from a female point of view, although we do have a few male authors on board. I have not distorted any facts or definitions. I have simply defined them in my article as they have been used for decades.
And for decades we thought that the earth was flat. For decades we thought the white man was the superior being. For decades we thought the earth was the center of the universe. There are many things that we simply think for decades without question, and it takes a few daring people to stand up and help find truth to enlighten others. I am not saying I am the one to change the face of the planet, however I am saying that I would like to see more research and substantiated facts instead of classical 'burn the heathen!' whenever some story comes out where a molester gets sent to jail instead of lynched, and labling any and all people who could be pedophiles under the same guise as this one man. It's generalizing, which, last I checked, was considered politically incorrect. Oh how I love the hypocrasy.
In reference to pedophiles:
A pedophile is by definition in any standard dictionary, someone affected with pedophilia. Pedophilia is subsequently defined as a sexual perversion where a child or children are the preferred sexual desire for the pedophile. In other words pedophilia is an abnormal interest in children when it comes to the sexual desires of a pedophile.
correct! However the DSM-IV states clearly that a pedophile is someone who "is characterized by sexual activity with a child, usually age 13 or younger, or in the case of an adolescent, a child 5 years younger than the pedophile."
It states sexual activity, meaning that according to the supposed proffessionals, by definition you are not a pedophile until you become a molester. This is almost worse than the general line of thinking in society, considering it does not make a difference between a molester who commits a crime because of the rush of the feeling of power and control it gives them, or because someones sexual desire has been so repressed their entire life that they snap.
There is a huge difference there. In the first case, the person would be at the very least borderline sociopath. In the second, it could be that it's a standard antisocial personality disorder derived from suppressing really strong desires. Hell, in the past woman had been given vibrators as a way to 'calm them down' when they start to show signs they were about to loose their mind. By suppressing desires I don't mean simply not doing the act, I mean not even talking about desires, never exploring those thoughts, never seeking a like-minded peer, always berating and hating ones-self for having the occassional deviant thought.
Best example would be celibacy in the church and the problems it had caused, such as killings and rape. It had been proven time and time again that celibacy is not a path for everybody. Humans are sexual animals, plain and simple. Thusly, imagine an entire group, thousands of individuals, whom will never talk or entertain the thoughts of their true desires. A few of them will snap, simply because the odds are so high.
There is no animosity here, simply fact, spoken from experience, both personal and professional.
One of my closest friends was raped by her dad when she was a toddler. She remembers the experience because she had nightmares about it for a very long time, and when she was old enough she talked to her dad about it.
Right now she is married, and has a daughter of her own. I have known her since my own childhood. She had always been a strong-willed individual who takes bullshit from no one, is stable, and as far as I know does not exibit any signs of malice towards her dad. She was affected, oh yes, but she is still stable and lives a normal life.
The rest of what you say makes it seem like everybody will be mentally unstable for the rest of their lives, no exceptions. Just because you have had a bad experience, doesn't mean that everybody else has. That is actually quite a myopic outlook on it all.
I plan to get my degree in Criminal Justice Administration and I plan to go after online child sexual predators and child pornographers personally, because someone destroyed my innocence and I vow to protect the innocence of other children because that is what we are supposed to do as adults.
You are a vigilante. You are out for vengence at any cost. This in itself does blind you, wether or not you notice. Others will notice, but since you are surrounded by people who don't mind if you are blinded, perhaps even encourage such thoughts, I would imagine it would be quite difficult to accept that yes, you do have a very one-sided, and happily so, view on the entire situation.
Entertain this thought and tell me if there is, at any point in your life, that you can learn to accept this. I am not saying what I am about to say is true, nor do I condone what I am about to say, but I believe in the possibilities of unknown and undiscovered potential.
Imagine, if you will, someone who is attracted to kids. He has a preference, somewhere between the ages 10 and 13. The reason for this, he tells himself, is that he needs to have some intellect and understanding. Without such, he does not find the individual attractive.
Said person has never touched a kid in an innappropriate place in his life, and never will. He is a mentor, though, going out and teaching kids about life, helping them understand concepts they have difficulty with, or introduce them to new concepts. He is the type of man who would protect a child with his life. The one thing he fears most isn't being caught, it isn't the social ramifications of being virtually exiled, but his greatest fear is that he will accidentally hurt a child, and thusly will do everything in his power to protect them. He will not hurt the ones he loves.
He even creates support groups for like-minded individuals. Other people with the same attractions he has. Not exactly like his, but close enough to where they can talk about how it affects their life, what they are doing to make sure they are comfortable, about close-call situations in which they became the better man or woman, about a special time they have with a young friend in a carnival having fun, or teaching their young friend to change a tire or fix a computer.
Nobody within the group, either, had any innappropriate contact with a child, and in fact uphold the belief that it is taboo to harm a child in any way as such. Just like normal society. They are normal individuals, and you could shake their hand knowing full well who they are, and being happy for and even proud of them. And they are the unspoken majority of the subgroup of pedophiles.
Now, if you can ever in your life believe something like this to be true, then maybe you should rethink acting the vigilante. Afterall, the vigilante is blinded to all but their malicious goal.
