The Reboot wrote
Interesting. I had come to the conclusion that individuals within the catholic church, who had such desires, had simply used the church as a "costume". I mean, upon face value people will naturally think, "Oh, this guy goes to church. He helps out at the soup kitchens and I confess my sins to him, he must be a good and trustworthy bloke." And judging by this "face value" impression we have, we don't think twice that he's actually a filthy child molesting scumbag. In fact, it's a well known documented tactic of the psychopath to pretend to be something he isn't to avoid detection. I don't know if you know much about the Claremont Serial Killer case, the most expensive investigation in WA police history. The guy that's only recently been caught was involved in a lot of "community" work, particularly with sports teams. I would even wager that many crooked politicians engage in this false virtue signalling type behaviour, just to score "brownie points". Some may do it to win elections and gain power. Others use it to kill in cold blood or molest children. I have come to this conclusion by observing the fact that within religion, there are a lot of dark individuals whose actions go undetected because a lot of money and effort goes into covering it up and that's across most, if not all faiths.
Your analysis that some obsessed paedophiles go to the trouble to join groups who are considered above reproach, especially those dealing with children, has merit. But in the case of the high rates of paedophilia within the Catholic Church, I doubt if most men with such tendencies would join such a strict and disciplined organisation specifically to gain access to children. They could more easily become boy scout leaders or begin a career in child minding than join a restrictive organisation like the Catholic church.
The problems of the church involve the recruitment of young men with probably no sexual experience at all, and then forcing them to maintain their virginity over their entire lives. Such a discipline is completely unnatural. Unable to form sexual relationships with women, they instead find that they can at times have real authority and control over children. In such a case, it is almost inevitable that they will become sexually attracted to children, even though they may not have been sexually attracted to children previously.
Power and control is a real factor in sexuality. In his book about the Gulf War, General Norman Schwatzkopf wrote that when he first got his general's stars, he was taken to a room by a senior officer and told in no uncertain terms the quickest way to lose them. The US Army recognised that whenever a man received general's stars, he suddenly considered himself more sexually attractive to women. And the US Army had a serious problem with newly minted generals chasing every female subordinate under his command around the office.
The next factor in the high rates of paedophilia within the Catholic Church, is that when the conditions to create a high rate of paedophilia occur within a closed society, then it can eventually be considered normal among the members of that closed society. As leadership positions become available, it is inevitable that high ranking members of the Catholic Church will be paedophiles themselves, and they will be protective of their younger or lower ranked members who think like they do.
As for the Claremont Serial Killer case, what I remember is that the WA police had a suspect that they were keeping under very close, 24 hour surveillance. Unable to pin him for the prior murders, all they could do was watch him and be there when he struck again. This surveillance was blown when the story leaked to the media, who publicised the surveillance, and the suspect learned that the police were watching him. Nice one, guys.
The Reboot wrote
Yep. This is why we have child sex rings, and why child pornography is prevalent. It is also common for rich men (and without a doubt, women, cause hey guess what? Women can be pedophiles too. Gasp!), likely in politics and finance, to fuck off to shithole countries like Thailand and the Phillipines, where they can get away with diddling children. It is a lot more prevalent than we are comfortable to admit to, but it's one of those things that sort of takes the back seat to what I call "non-issues" such as identity politics, "invasion day" and the like. What we should be concerned about is those in high places who work so hard to cover it up and grant rights to them when they gave up their rights the moment they took away a child's through defilement.
I agree with all of that. But I would like to make the obvious fact that female paedophilia is generally not considered anywhere near as bad as male paedophilia. Although, sometimes, the media will publish fire and brimstone articles denouncing a female paedophile and pretending that it is. As a matter of fact, many men openly approve of it, even the "victims." In George Crile's book "Charlie Wilson's War", the author recounted the story of a US Secret agent who in his early teens had matured into a highly intelligent, physically strong, handsome, and very healthy looking young boy. The 15 year old had subsequently engaged in an ongoing sexual relationship with his best buddy's mother. The agent's opinion of his "victimisation" was, "If that's paedophilia, then I thoroughly recommend it to every 15 year old boy."
The movie industry is well aware of the audience pulling power of stories involving sexual relationships between boys and mature women. There have been a string of movies, usually about attractive teachers having sexual relationships with boy students. Even Kate Blanchett acted as the "villain" in such a movie. In the USA in real life, there have been a string of convictions involving very attractive female teachers having sexual relationships with young male students. While the media stories about these women are full of self righteous indignation and utter condemnation, I think most men would think about the "victims", "You lucky little bastard."
The Reboot wrote
I honestly believe that practising intolerance and issuing out harsher penalties would be more effective than pandering to their "fetish". By doing that it sends a message that it is too dangerous to be a pedophile. One may argue that it will just be covered up or hidden more, but guess what? It's like that now, anyway. At least if they are caught, they can be shot rather than resources such as food in prison, "reform" and "anti libido medication" being wasted on the pieces of shit. If that makes me a "fascist", then so be it -- this scenario is a lot different than say, drawing a satirical picture of Serena Williams that a bunch of pussies think is "offensive".
But that "solution" does not take into account that the penalties for paedophilia are already extremely severe, especially in the USA. Not only that, those sent to prison are usually very roughly handled by inmates. In a book I read about Goulbourne jail, it recounts the arrival of paedophile actor Robert Hughes from the "Hey Dad!" television sitcom. Within seconds of entering the prison grounds, he was pelted with bags of excrement and urine, and had death threats levelled at him by prisoners who looked very capable of carrying out those threats. Being convicted of being a paedophile is one of the worst things you can imagine. Men who have these tendencies, and there may be a lot of them, would probably consider the a much safer alternative like a sex doll, to procuring and using the real thing, to be a godsend. (if that is the right metaphor)
The Reboot wrote
For instance, for argument's sake: in my late teens it was still pretty unacceptable for a person to have sexual inclinations towards the same sex. Because of this, I was frightened to be "open" about my attraction to other females. Of course, like most other human beings, I have "needs". You know how I "dealt" with said "needs"? Self-pleasure. Gross, I know. Immoral to some, I know. But hey, I didn't go out and "rape" or "defile" something that wasn't mine to do so. I only ever have sexual relations with consenting adults too, despite many in the "far-right" camp equating it to be the same thing.
But isn't a rubber doll simply a more realistic version of sex with less need for fantasising during masturbation? Especially so, if these dolls are so realistic and even express pleasure during the act? And especially so, when considering the difficulties in obtaining a real child sex partner, and the appalling consequences that would eventuate if caught?
The Reboot wrote
The point is, if you are that sexually depraved that pleasuring oneself and letting your "depravity" out isn't going to do the trick, than neither will a lifelike sex doll.
Not for females, because I don't even know if sex dolls for females even exist. ( I have not been studying this subject) But for males, that concept is very debatable. I would opine, that for most males who have "needs" to have sex with a minor, using a realistic sex doll that even expresses pleasure is infinitely less risky than trying to procure the real thing, and suffering the very unpleasant consequences if caught. The fact that so many children are abducted, raped, and murdered tends to indicate that men who need to have sex with children or minors are very aware of the consequences should they get caught, and murdering their victims to shut them up is the usual practice. In addition, there may be males with strong sexual attractions towards children who are themselves deeply ashamed of their own feelings, and would never approach a child for sex. Once again, a lifelike sex doll which expresses pleasure would be the perfect victimless solution to the man's problems.
The Reboot wrote
The "likeness" to real life will only drive the obsession further. It's like a marijuana addict who wants to "explore" what else is out there, so they try LSD, magic mushrooms and then they may dabble into something harder, like heroin or meth. That never ended well with anybody.
I agree that some people have trouble with self control and no matter what the vice. They can not stop themselves becoming more and more involved until it overwhelms them. A woman I once asked to marry me is now a brain damaged drug addict. But most people do have self control, and that includes men (and women) who are sexually attracted to children. It does not mean that every or even most paedophiles who may enjoy heightened and more realistic sexual pleasure from a sex doll will automatically go onto openly molesting children. Doing so is a very dangerous thing to do, fraught with very severe penalties, and an ongoing life of public humiliation and social ostracism. That may even include the shunning by one's own family. A sex doll is a lot less risky in terms of discovery, or in attempting to procure a real child sex partner.
The Reboot wrote
Look, I may be a fascist but I will condemn a pedophile whether they act on it or not. People like that need to be eradicated from the earth. If they can stay celibate and restrict themselves to their "imagination", good on them. But still, we shouldn't be encouraging it and those who are selling child-like sex dolls and capitalizing on the "fetish" are just as bad as pedophiles. It's sick, plain and simple.
You may need to eradicate a lot of males and females from this earth. And I am surprised that you condemn all people who have deviant tendencies, whether they act on them or not, when you have informed us about your own sexuality, which probably half the population of Australia still considers deviant. In our Christian culture, temptation is not a sin. Every one of us has fantasised about murdering or beating the ever lovin' shit some bastard we hate, but it is only a crime if you act on your fantasies.
You could say that male paedophiles who do target and molest children do deserve it, but the majority of men might disagree with you about female paedophiles. Because although the Sisterhood can not accept it, male and female attitudes to sexuality are different. While a male teacher bonking his 15 year old female student would be regarded by parents and grandparents as utterly evil, a 15 year old male "victim" of a female teacher would have something to brag about with his mates.
Even female "victims" might not consider themselves victimised. Former Prime Minister Bob Hawke's second wife, Blanche d'Apulget wrote a biography of her own life where she bragged about getting regularly bonked as a 14 year old schoolgirl by an (unnamed) respected judge, in the judge's own chambers, while still in her Dover Heights, private girl's school uniform.
The Reboot wrote
Alas, thank you for a good topic and thank you for an intellectually stimulating debate void of red herrings and sneery one-liners
And I thank you too.
