| Author |
Message |
    
Sabiana
Veteran Poster
Username: Sabiana
Post Number: 230
Registered: 08-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, June 12, 2008 - 08:34 pm: | 
|
Am I too old fashioned?
Seriously, would you buy any child that you know high heeled shoes? I mean, I remember being a kid a trying on My mothers high heeled shoes, but Damn. What next, baby sized Lingerie?  
 |
Abm
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Abm
Post Number: 10068
Registered: 04-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, June 13, 2008 - 11:08 am: |
|
This is just a part of the increasing sexualization of children.
Watch. The next thing you'll see are thong bikini underware for preschoolers.
And foks wonder why child sex offenders are running rampant all over the place. |
Yvettep
AALBC .com Platinum Poster
Username: Yvettep
Post Number: 2947
Registered: 01-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, June 13, 2008 - 01:32 pm: |
|
I agree, Sabiana, I am not a fan of this kind of thing. And I do not care if it is "old fashioned" or not. A lot of the playing with Mommy's high heels you speak of was related more to us identifying with our mothers and other grown women we knew and looked up to rather than necessarily experimenting with our sexuality.
ABM, I agree about the increasing sexual objectification of kids. However, it is important to note that there is not necessarily a direct correlation between this and pedophilia. Often what sex offenders of children are "attracted" to is children as children and whatever that may represent (e.g., their increased power over and ability to control the kids). As such, seeing a visibly identifiable child wearing adult-like attire is not necessarily going to trigger such individuals, nor make others turn into child predators.
The other important point, of course, is that there have always been sexual predators of children and in the large majority of cases these folks are known to the kids they abuse. It is likely that our awareness of this has increased, and more folks are talking openly about the abuse they have suffered as children. But unfortunately it has always been around.
A few days ago I posted a piece from NPR about the daughter of a well-known civil rights figure who has come forward about the sexual abuse she suffered by her father. |
Abm
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Abm
Post Number: 10069
Registered: 04-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, June 13, 2008 - 02:14 pm: |
|
Yvettep,
Is there only ONE kind of pedophile? Only one source of motivation for adults sexing children?
Do ALL pedophiles only seek to sex children who dress and act like children?
And I don't know how and why the fact that an uncle or cousin might attempt to sexually abuse his young kin would be mutually exclusive from the fact the child is skipping around him looking like a miniature streetwalker. If anything, I think that might be an even greater inducement for his sick/twisted mind to rationalize why it's okay for his to do his dirty deed. |
Yvettep
AALBC .com Platinum Poster
Username: Yvettep
Post Number: 2949
Registered: 01-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, June 13, 2008 - 02:26 pm: |
|
Is there only ONE kind of pedophile? Only one source of motivation for adults sexing children?
No--which is why I qualified my statements above (e.g., "not necessarily"..."often"...) However, the idea that women (and men, for that matter) and children become targets for sexual abuse because of the way they dress is incredibly dangerous notion--and one that does not jibe with empirical facts. This kind of "blaming the victim," though not completely absent, is at least not as prevalent as it once was.
Regarding "justification"--yes, you are correct that such garments could become part of pedophiles' rationale. But all sorts of things are often part of their "explanation" for their behavior, and the absence of "Heel-arious" brand footware is not going to stop these people, nor remove their self- and external justifications.
That is not to say that early sexualization of children can not be highly damaging. Kids have always explored their own sexuality and that has not changed, certainly. But the difference is when this "exploration" is pushed on them from the outside, and at early ages when they are not ready. I think a fair amount of psychological pathology and distress has been associated with this kind of thing--eating disorders, depression, etc. |
Ferociouskitty
Veteran Poster
Username: Ferociouskitty
Post Number: 222
Registered: 02-2008
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, June 13, 2008 - 02:55 pm: |
|
Yvette:
Your comments/observations bring to mind conversations I've had with our mutual friend, Baba. [Baba is a therapist who specializes in group and individual counseling for convicted sex offenders). I wanted to know what makes someone even think of a child in a sexual way--and I also wanted to know how he (Baba) could do that kind of work day in and day out. My hat goes off to him--because I still can't wrap my brain around stuff like pedophilia as a "disease." He admits that there are some guys he works with that he just wants to strangle, therapy be-damned.
No comment about those shoes. *eyeroll* |
Abm
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Abm
Post Number: 10070
Registered: 04-2004
Rating: 
Votes: 2 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, June 13, 2008 - 02:59 pm: |
|
Yvettep,
I wouldn't blame children for how they dress. I'd blame their parents.
And if how we do or don't dress shouldn't have any bearing on things then why aren't we allowed to walking around in public in the nude? We as a society and culture have decided we should dress in certain ways so as to avoid inciting certain kinds of problems.
And while adults should be free to style themselves within the limits of the law, children are not prepared to handle what might come of their indulging such liberties.
Btw: If I were to running into a burning house, collapse and die, would I the victim be to blame for my own death? |
Yvettep
AALBC .com Platinum Poster
Username: Yvettep
Post Number: 2951
Registered: 01-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, June 13, 2008 - 04:44 pm: |
|
My hat goes off to him...
Yup, FK. That makes two of us. I have worked with a couple of kids post abuse. The progress is very slow. I don't think I would last long doing that day in and day out. |
Sabiana
Veteran Poster
Username: Sabiana
Post Number: 231
Registered: 08-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, June 13, 2008 - 04:53 pm: |
|
Btw: If I were to running into a burning house, collapse and die, would I the victim be to blame for my own death?
Not fair. Thats an illogical situation. It bothers me because that's the same line of defense that if a woman is sexually assaulted- a woman asks to raped, or it is somehow her fault. Funny enough, the blame is never but on the person who commits the act. (Not ignoring the LGBT community)
Look at this article:
It’s the only way Tory Bowen knows to honestly describe what happened to her.
She was raped.
But a judge prohibited her from uttering the word “rape” in front of a jury. The term “sexual assault” also was taboo, and Bowen could not refer to herself as a victim or use the word “assailant” to describe the man who allegedly raped her.
The defendant’s presumption of innocence and right to a fair trial trumps Bowen’s right of free speech, said the Lincoln, Neb., judge who issued the order.
“It shouldn’t be up to a judge to tell me whether or not I was raped,” Bowen said. “I should be able to tell the jury in my own words what happened to me.”
Bowen’s case is part of what some prosecutors and victim advocates see as a national trend in sexual assault cases.
“It’s a topic that’s coming up more and more,” said Joshua Marquis, an Oregon prosecutor and a vice president of the National District Attorneys Association. “You’re moving away from what a criminal trial is really about.”
In Jackson County, Senior Judge Gene Martin recently issued a similar order for the trial of a Kansas City man charged with raping a teenager in 2000. Despite the semantic restrictions, the Jackson County jury last week found Ray Slaughter guilty of forcible rape and two counts of forcible sodomy.
Slaughter’s attorney, who requested the pretrial order, declined to comment because she is preparing a motion for new trial. The judge also declined to comment.
Bowen’s case gained national notoriety and drew the attention of free-speech proponents after she filed a lawsuit challenging the judge’s actions as a First Amendment violation. A federal appeals court dismissed the suit, but Bowen’s attorney plans to petition the U.S. Supreme Court.
Although he dismissed her suit, a federal judge said he doubted a jury would be swayed by a woman using the word “rape” instead of some “tortured equivalent.”
“For the life of me, I do not understand why a judge would tell an alleged rape victim that she cannot say she was raped when she testifies in a trial about rape,” wrote U.S. District Judge Richard G. Kopf.
Wendy J. Murphy, an adjunct professor at the New England School of Law in Boston, is representing Bowen. She said the practice is “absolutely” unconstitutional.
“There’s no law anywhere that allows courts to issue these kinds of orders against private citizens,” Murphy said. “That doesn’t mean judges aren’t doing it.”
Prosecutors may object, but rarely do they have the time and resources to stop a trial midstream to appeal, she said.
But in cases where the defendant’s version of events is pitted against that of the alleged victim, “words are really important,” Marquis said.
“To force a victim to say, ‘when the defendant and I had sexual intercourse’ is just absurd,” he said.
Jackson County Prosecutor Jim Kanatzar said juries are smart enough to understand that in the adversarial system of justice, the state is going to take one position and the defense is going to take another.
“These are common terms that are used both in and outside the courtroom,” he said. “If someone says something that one side feels is prejudicial, it can be addressed in cross-examination.”
The issue is a discretionary call with judges, said Jackson County Circuit Judge Brian C. Wimes, who did not preside over Slaughter’s trial. Wimes said he typically would not grant a pretrial order limiting certain words, but he would verbally tell the attorneys to avoid using words in a prejudicial or inflammatory way.
(from http://www.kansascity.com/105/story/654147.html)
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
Abm- I feel a woman/man does not consent to sex, the act is rape/sexual assault. But I feel this society] makes social "excuses" that in the end, makes the person of an sexual assualt feel shamed.
Why was a woman barred from saying "rape", (in a RAPE case), and told to use the phrase "sexual intercourse."?  |
Yvettep
AALBC .com Platinum Poster
Username: Yvettep
Post Number: 2952
Registered: 01-2005
Rating: 
Votes: 2 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, June 13, 2008 - 05:00 pm: |
|
Sabiana, I heard about this case. Perhaps I spoke too soon in saying the tide was turning against a "blame the victim" mentality. (And note, ABM, I am not saying that is what you were doing.)
As for If I were to running into a burning house, collapse and die, would I the victim be to blame for my own death? :
A better analogy would be to say to the victim of arson, "Well, if you didn't have such a nice home, you wouldn't have tempted the arsonist to torch it..." |
Abm
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Abm
Post Number: 10072
Registered: 04-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, June 13, 2008 - 05:18 pm: |
|
Sabiana,
Being a woman doesn't license you to be stupid.
There are PUULENTY of things I will not do, places I will not go and PEOPLE I will not associate with because the sheht could get me killed.
Is it LEGAL for me to do all those things? Sure.
Is it WISE...Hell no.
That's an interesting article you posted, though I am not sure how it relates to what we're currently discussing.
I guess the court's issue with using the term rape is that it use biases the viewpoint of a jury in such a way that a it become difficult for the jury to make a fair and reasoned assessment of what happened.
I don't know whether I totally buy that argument. But I can see some merit in that.
Yvettep,
You still might burn that sucker down if the money you stand to get from fire insurance is MORE than the house is worth.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! |
Cynique
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Cynique
Post Number: 12311
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, June 13, 2008 - 06:12 pm: |
|
Interesting discussion. Isn't there a school of thought that espouses the idea that pedophilia is an incurable condition stemming from how the brain is wired? Some male pedophiles have even suggested that castration is the only thing that would deter their urges.
Then there are lechers who are turned on by grown women dressing up like young girls to fulfill fantasies.
And of course there are the female pedophiles of the school teacher variety who become fixated on their young male students. They are examples of those who don't jibe with the idea that external factors like provocative clothing are a factor. |
Ntfs_encryption
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Ntfs_encryption
Post Number: 3207
Registered: 10-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, June 17, 2008 - 05:39 pm: |
|
"This is just a part of the increasing sexualization of children.
Watch. The next thing you'll see are thong bikini underware for preschoolers.
And foks wonder why child sex offenders are running rampant all over the place."
I agree 100%. It's pathetic. I was having breakfast with a friend yesterday when a family came in. I noticed this young girl in the group was dressed like a hooker. High heels, make up, no stockings, black skimpy six inch above the knee dress. I was appalled. My friend and I overheard her tell someone in their group that she would enter high school this fall and they were congratulating her.
It was just another example of parents wanting to be their children's best friends and big brothers/sisters rather than responsible parents. Her mother was dressed like a trollop also. I guess the apple doesn't fall far from the tree..... |
A_womon
AALBC .com Platinum Poster
Username: A_womon
Post Number: 2293
Registered: 05-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, June 18, 2008 - 03:57 am: |
|
I can't believe that men refuse to separate how one dresses from who they are or what they are trying to portray.
If dressing is s factor to induce men to "become" pedophiles, why do men ( a lot of them professionals I might add)travel to 3rd world countries to have sex with babies who are kept in shacks wearing barely anything at all? why is it when most pedophiles are caught, the only pictures they have of their poor INNOCENT victims are always nude? Why wouldn't they have thousands of pictures of them dressed provocatively as is suggested here?
To suggest that a child has somehow devloped the motivation or internal machinations it would take to purposely dress in certain clothing to provoke men/women to attack them sexually is truly dangerous thinking. How could anyone but a sick twisted individual look at a 2, 3, 4, 5 year old, ANY child in a sexual manner NO MATTER HOW THEY ARE DRESSED?
For anyone to point to dress and try to somehow juxtaposition this to the number of pedophiles who are out there just doesn't make sense. |
Ntfs_encryption
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Ntfs_encryption
Post Number: 3213
Registered: 10-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, June 18, 2008 - 07:08 am: |
|
"If dressing is s factor to induce men to "become" pedophiles, why do men ( a lot of them professionals I might add)travel to 3rd world countries to have sex with babies who are kept in shacks wearing barely anything at all?"
Dressing is not a precursor for pedophilia. These men are ready have a predisposition for this sickening behavior. It's just the way they are.
"why is it when most pedophiles are caught, the only pictures they have of their poor INNOCENT victims are always nude? Why wouldn't they have thousands of pictures of them dressed provocatively as is suggested here?"
Has nothing to do with it my dear. Clothes (children dressed provocatively) are an arousing mental aphrodisiac but the ultimate goal is a sexual encounter "minus" the clothes.
"How could anyone but a sick twisted individual look at a 2, 3, 4, 5 year old, ANY child in a sexual manner NO MATTER HOW THEY ARE DRESSED?"
What makes someone heterosexual? What bio-physiological process takes place to make someone left handed vice right handed? Hard to say. It's just the way they (pedophiles) are and there is nothing that can change or cure them other than a bullet in the head (my favorite choice). |
Abm
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Abm
Post Number: 10074
Registered: 04-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, June 18, 2008 - 08:20 am: |
|
You ladies are asserting the logistical fallacy that there can be only ONE reason why a pedophile does what he or she does. Or that there is only ONE kind of pedophile. I, however, contend that - like with almost any other behavior – there may be SEVERAL reasons why pedophiles do what they do. That Pedophile A might be incited by a different catalyst than Pedophile B.
For example, some pedophiles prey on children they know. Others are of the stranger-danger variety. Some pedophiles prey on little girls. Others little boys. Some on infants. Others on teenagers. Some are domestic pedophiles. Others pursue children in foreign lands.
Are ALL of them thinking and doing the exact SAME thing for the exact SAME reason?
I doubt that.
And as I asked before, if how we dress does not induce certain kinds of behavior, why do we have dress codes, laws against public nudity & stripping, etc.? That is because we all KNOW if we dress – or DON’T dress – a certain way, we may encourage undesirable behavior.
If such can occur amongst those of us who do NOT attempt to have sex with children, why would this not affect the thoughts and behavior of pedophiles?
One of the reasons why so many of our children are being abused is we PARENTS refuse to take control of and be responsible for the behavior of our children.
For example, most would vilify R. Kelly for his allegedly (and I only say "allegedly" because NONE of the female's he's 'alleged' to have abused have attempted to have him formally CHARGED with such) sexually abusing some young girls. I, however, vilify the PARENTS of all those girls who either KNOW their children were cavorting with a pedophile (one whose reputation for such had got very well-known by the time he’d abused his +10th victim) or of being totally NEGLIGENT parents.
And if we PARENTS are going to allow – if not TRAIN – our daughters to be whores, then whores are WTF they’re going to be treated as. |
Yvettep
AALBC .com Platinum Poster
Username: Yvettep
Post Number: 2967
Registered: 01-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, June 18, 2008 - 01:22 pm: |
|
ABM, I am just speechless. You are prepared to "blame" clothing, parents, the victims themselves, but not the adult perpetrators.
There does seem to be some errors in logic, but we "ladies" are not the source. For example, dress codes are fully the result of climate and societal norms. Using your logic, we would expect to find more rapes in societies with more nudity. But that is not the case. Rape and molestation are first and foremost about power and control, not sexual desire. Period.
I am usually able to engage in any manner of back and forth banter on any topic. This is not one of them. You obviously also have strong feelings on the subject, so I will just leave you to them. |
Abm
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Abm
Post Number: 10077
Registered: 04-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, June 18, 2008 - 03:04 pm: |
|
Yvettep,
I am NOT "blaming" a dayam thing on clothing. I am saying STOP encouraging and facilitating stuff everybody's going to be b*tchin' and moanin' about later.
Where the hell do the societal norms of dress codes come from but from people realizing it's DUMB for foks to dress and carry on a certain way.
If our style of dress don't matter, why don't we all just walk around naked or in loin cloths or something?
Or better yet, lets put tramp stamps, thong bikinis and bullet-nippled bustiers on our first graders and let them stroll up and down urban street corners.
And I swear the next time I witness a chick declare that rape is about power and control, and not sex, I swear I'm going to repossess somebody's vulva.
How can a bare, hard dykk be a part of the commission of an act that is NOT sexual. That's just not metaphysically POSSIBLE.
If it's just about control and power and not sex, can't MANY - if not MOST - men physically overpower and control MANY - if not MOST - women and children WITHOUT laying pipe to them?
Really, Yvette. No disrespect to you and those who think like you do. But the sad irony of what you and other women have been trained to espouse is that it does more to elicit and cover up what you lament than it does to prevent and cure such. |
Yvettep
AALBC .com Platinum Poster
Username: Yvettep
Post Number: 2971
Registered: 01-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, June 18, 2008 - 04:13 pm: |
|
No disrespect to you, ABM, but you seem to be equating a physiological response (e.g., erection) with a psychological state (sexual desire)--and, by extension, the decision to act on that psychological state. For most people, these three things line up in some form of socially recognized norms--for example, with other adults, with only adults who also consent, etc. Of course many, many folks have fetishes or other "kinks" that are outside the norm of mainstream society. But in many cases these, too, involve others who are legally adults and are consenting.
Nowhere did I say that "rape is about power and control, and not sex" or that it is "just about" power and control; I said that "Rape and molestation are first and foremost about power and control, not sexual desire." This is in contrast to saying that "Rape and molestation are first and foremost about sexual desire."
These are acts of violence, not alternative expressions of sexuality. These acts are about gratification through dominance and power imbalance. Not the natural consequnce of a "bare, hard dykk."
As an aside: Power and control can come through many things, such as sexualized language that results in a highly charged atmosphere that objectifies women and their bodies. Much like saying the next time I witness a chick declare that rape is about power and control, and not sex, I swear I'm going to repossess somebody's vulva.
I have said in previous comments that I disagree with dressing children in mini-adult outfits. (And actually, I disagree with this whether the outfits are traditionally "sexualized" or not.) There are many reasons to object to this practice. What I say is dangerous, is objecting to this practice because of the belief that the clothes people where is a direct contributing factor for rape and abuse. As I said, there are/have been folks who have dressed in loin cloths or naked. These were not societies chock full of rampant rapists.
One more point, since I know from what Troy has said previously that there are many lurkers to these boards. Chances are that every single person on this board knows a survivor of sexual abuse or rape. All of us. We may not know that they are a survivor, in part because they know the stigma that accompanies this admission.
Now my rant on this topic is officially (really this time) over. |
Abm
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Abm
Post Number: 10079
Registered: 04-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, June 18, 2008 - 05:13 pm: |
|
Yvettep,
First, lemme backtrack and say I did not say that suggestive clothing was the primary reason for why grown men molest children. Rather, I think marketing of adult, suggestive clothing is a PART of a growing whorish, lascivious, skripper/pornstar culture that results in our thinking, Hell, anything goes, some of which includes screwing kids.
Sure foks have all kinds of kinky quirks, fetishes, sexual additions, etc. But really. On what PLANET has there been no connection between the physiological state of an erect penis, the psychological desire for sexual gratification AND the decision to ACT upon that erect penis and desire for sexual gratification?
These fallacious disassociations of penis, desire and act are inherently have been concocted largely to salve the concerns women (and wussy men) have about some of the more fearsome elements of masculinity.
Believe it or not, just because we admit there is a sexual element to grown men wanting to have sex with teenage girls does NOT mean that we must permit such to happen. And that some fools actually ACT on that desire does NOT mean their intention are nonsexual just because we agree they are also wrong and deviant.
I am not going to debate whether one rapes/molests more for control/power or sexual desire. Hell, honestly, I don’t see whether and how that is even relevant IF all of those factor into what is going down. But I’ll ask (again): WHY if it’s mostly about power/control do those who rape and molest women/child is their primary MODE of exerting that control SEXUAL. There are LOTS of other ways a man can wield power/dominion of others WITHOUT his growing and slinging a woody.
And, perhaps this will make you REALLY uncomfortable, I’ll proffer that very often when we non-raping/molesting men have sex with adult women, many of whom we mutually love, hell, are even married to and share a life with, the dykkin’ IS as much about POWER/CONTROL as it is about SEX.
Don’t act like you ain’t grown and don’t already know.
And you can try to use the repossessing the vulva comment to paint me the misogynist all you want to. But I know well enuff about what’s going on out there to know that many of the greatest objectifiers and exploiters of the female body these days are FEMALES themselves.
Too many women want to serve hot, wet a$s out trampy platter then get p*ssed when some fool man takes a bite out of what he figure is being marketed as The Catch Of The Day fish. |
Carey
Veteran Poster
Username: Carey
Post Number: 792
Registered: 05-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, June 18, 2008 - 05:14 pm: |
|
WOW...I've witness many debates on this board and when two big hitters go at it nothing is more compelling to watch.
Excellent points given by both. I felt the frustrations. This a topic in which the internet wins. Without the nuiances of face to face debate...give and take...instant responses, this topic/discussion could go on for ever with both side feeling drain and disgusted.
They hadn't fell pray to calling each other MFers but....
ABM is a Pro, it appears he could argue the positives of an issue even if he disagreed with it. Vette is a formidable foe and is up for the challenge and knows when to shut it down.
Good stuff |
Cynique
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Cynique
Post Number: 12326
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, June 18, 2008 - 07:10 pm: |
|
Pedophilia is a controverisl subject for discussions and wouldn't be so ambiguous if the minds of females matured at the same rate as their bodies or if the penises of males did not usurp their good judgment.
Presumably pedophilia is about the chronological age of a victim, not about adult temptresses dressing provocatively. |
|
Email This Page