Find this dirty bastard

Quote :

See, I have studied psychology at university, and given this adult male has abducted and raped a child, I think it's clear he is a paedophile

If you have studied psychology, then you will know that this is an act of child sexual assault. Not all child sexual offenders are paedophiles and it's simplistic to make this assumption.

Psychology 101 doesn't make you a psychologist.

You know what I find interesting about you... When people disagree with you, the first thing you do is make suggestions or inferences that they are somehow 'flustered' or 'not quite right'...

doing this doesn't make you any 'righter'...

Hey, you were the one who accused me of taking something, yet still haven't defined what it is exactly you found off-beat or strange about the subject matter.


Cos...if you disagree with something I have said, then put forth your argument.


Btw, what's your definition of a paedophile?

Quote :

Not all child sexual offenders are paedophiles

-Erotica




OMG!


A paedophile is an individual who is sexually attracted to children/child.

A child sex offender is an individual who acts on this.

Are you suggesting the man who raped this child wasn't necessarily sexually aroused or attracted to the child prior to committing the act?

If so....

What was the motive for abducting and raping the child if he wasn't sexually attracted to her, this and wasn't a paedophile Erotica?

Was he being mind-controlled by aliens?

Someone held a gun to his head which caused a spontaneous erection whereby they forced him to rape her at gun-point?

This poor little wretch (the little girl) will never sleep tight again....this or have pleasant dreams.

Dont worry, he will be dealt with inside.

What the hell is psychology 101?


I studied both behavioural sciences and psychology....this and have enough brain capacity to know that your statement..."not all child sexual offenders are paedophiles" makes you look rather naive ...at best.

I can see it's pointless arguing with you.

And it's not really fair when you obviously don't know what you are talking about.

You cant even argue your own flawed logic, so what makes you think you can dismantle mine?

If he wasn't a paedophile Erotica this is sexually attracted to the child to begin with, then what was his motive for abducting then raping her?

Was he sleep fucking, thought who he was penetrating was a grown woman?

Mistaken identity even?


I especially enjoyed the footage of him being carried out of the house ...the way one might carry a pig on a spit.

How befitting I thought.

According to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), pedophilia is specified as a form of paraphilia in which a person either has acted on intense sexual urges towards children, or experiences recurrent sexual urges towards and fantasies about sexual activity with children.

___________________________

Might I suggest you take this argument up with those "more" qualified Erotica, those who are indeed qualified to define what a paedophile is and isn't...ie, those who actually write the DSM criteria?


So , do they not know what they're talking about either?


... Cultural perversions/differences aside.... the man is a paedophile come child sex offender after having acted on his sexual urges, end of story.

Nut-case dismissed~

I wonder what his sentence will be.

I hope it's a long one!!

They will go easy on him 'judically' because he is indigenous and young, however his inmates and prison staff dont care much for political correctness, I have heard of cases whereby food spiking and all manner of "sudden" unthinkable things occure... *gasps*

Dennis Ferguson was different, was looked after inside for a reason,(he had contacts and the names of those who had reputations to maintain, and still does ie, contacts )...... but this kid doesnt stand a chance, I doubt wether he is involved in any sort of paedophile ring, wouldnt be connected in anyway, so wont be recieving any 'serious' protection behind bars thats for sure.


This pleases me.

And even then, Dennis Ferguson wasnt infalable, he copped his fair share of staff initiated retribution inside..... i'm suprised he's still alive, with respects to some of the rumours ....re-what kitchen staff put in his food at John Moroney ( which is just around the corner from where I live)...

:)Small world hu!


And to think, that was just the kitchen staff........pmsl

He is known to the victims family, so I am assuming the parents of the little girl are bogan ferals too.

I mean, you any of you let THAT thing in your house? Let alone near your child?

Some people don't deserve to have kids, I swear!

Not sure of the circumstances yet, though all the indicators point towards them being as you say, feral bogan trash.


Honestly, how do you not hear your 8 year old being disturbed from her sleep in the dead of night, this or being awkwardly lifted through her bedroom window against her will ?

strange wrote:

Not sure of the circumstances yet, though all the indicators point towards them being as you say, feral bogan trash.


Honestly, how do you not hear your 8 year old being disturbed from her sleep in the dead of night, this or being awkwardly lifted through her bedroom window against her will ?

I'm sure her parents will be asking themselves that question for the rest of their lives. Even 'feral bogan trash' parents generally love their kids.

You appear to have empathy for everyone bar the victim herself.

You haven't mentioned a word about how she might be feeling right now.

You have expressed empathy and concern for the offender, feel pity for the parents, .....


Have you forgotten who the victim is Erotica?

Talk about misplaced blame.

People who are sexually attracted to children are paedophiles, and those who act on their impulsions, desires are child sex offenders also.

Child sex offenders are people who either exploit children sexually themselves in the flesh, or advantage somehow from others doing so, ie, people who view , purchase or sell, proliferate child porn.

Homosexuality isn't the same as paedophilia, in that adults are capable of making informed decisions about their own sexuality, are not violating the rights of vulnerable others in order to have their own needs met.

Child sex offenders are intrinsically selfish, empty and conscienceless individuals, whereby they regress to violating others rites in order to have their own needs met for self gratification purposes.

Anyone who violates one of the most fundamental of human rites, the right to simply be allowed to grow up without having been used to meet someone else's depraved sexual needs is quite simply a loathsome immoral and selfish miscreant who deserves to be put out of theirs and other peoples misery. Preying on, and violating the rights of vulnerable others must take it's toll on their psych in the long run, because no matter how much they try to justify their inclinations, deep down they know they are damaged , defective goods whom the majority of the human population loathes already, without having so much as got to know them as individuals.

You will find most of these people aren't happy with themselves, this or don't generally have too many RL friends either. They are usually loners , because they have a tendency to drag others "normal" people down around them, have warped ideals...(and not only on the subject of paedophilia) ....for there will never be that mutual respect between paedophile and non-paedophile folk the way heterosexual people respect homosexuals, simply because one is fundamentally self-indulgent, harmful and predatory, (not traits you would normally tolerate in a non-peddo friend even) the other is simply their own sexual preference. Paedophiles who act on their impulsions get off on violating the rights of vulnerable innocent others..(same with people who are sadistic to animals) ....Like the old saying goes, if they can hurt an innocent child or animal, for their own deviant pleasures, then they would think nothing of hurting another who just so happens to give them reason enough in their own mind to do so.

These people don't often need a reason, their reasoning is "I want it".... end of story.

Not "what effect will this have on others"


They just don't make good friends, they are critically flawed.

Too self absorbed and indulgent to give a damn about anyone but themselves.

Which is why most are single.

misplaced blame? What the fuck are you going on about?

Stating that most parents love their kids is misplacing blame?

If not misplaced, then what?


---- You sympathised and expressed concern for the 21 year old child sex offender, argued that he may not be a paedophile at all. You then attacked me for having referred to him as such, despite my having put the DSM criteria up for you...then attempted to berate me by implying I simply don't know what I'm talking about, when anyone in their right mind would agree, that in order to have raped the child, he must have been sexually attracted to her to begin with thus he's a paedophile. Tell me, is this because he's aboriginal Erotica? If he were white would you feel just as sympathetic, and be so willing to rationalise his abduction and rape of a child .... or are you just a peddo empath in general?

Tell me, do you still stand by what you said, re- child sex offenders/rapists not necessarily being paedophiles?

If so, how does one commit 3 acts of rape on a 8 year old child after having abducted/lured her to a park at night , this and can argue they weren't sexually attracted to the child?

You need re-educating girl.

You really do!

I think I might know who's more likely to have a relative who's a peddo Erotica...and I can assure you, it isn't me!

Why else would you sympathise and defend these creatures, this or question what is clearly fact, in accordance with the DSMIV criteria.. if you weren't somehow conflicted somehow yourself?

If someone you loved/love hurt you or someone else, this doesn't mean you have to spend the rest of your life normalising, justifying their actions, this or even trying to make sense of them, because unless you are a peddo yourself, you never will. They have faulty wiring, are sick.





OK.

you are a lunatic.

Erotica, coming from you this is a compliment, really it is.


We are talking about a man who raped an 8 year old child in a park 3 times which resulted in her sustaining internal injuries...(she must have been in agony), a man who managed to get hard at least three times in order to have raped this child to begin with, ..yet you claim he may not have been sexually attracted to her afterall, ie, might not be a paedophile?



Sorry, Erotica, but you would be flat out getting anyone (qualified, educated, or lay) to agree with you on this.... your logic must be so flawed.


I wish you would try and see reason.

Understand what I'm trying to say here.

Why cant you?

The definition of a paedophile is an adult who is sexually attracted to children, (some are attracted to adults also)...so just because they get hard over you, isn't to say they aren't a peddo.

This 21 year old man was clearly sexually attracted to the child he raped in the park, thus is a paedophile.

there is way too much misinformation in your ramblings to even respond to. you win the prize for the most words about nothing.

and stop trying to make it personal when you are stuck for how to argue. it makes you look like a fool.


in this case the 'blame' squarely lies with the adult offender - not the parents, not the child.

whether or not he is a paedophile is of no consequence. he is a child sex offender. and (hopefully) he will be convicted of his crimes and locked away for a very long time.

there is way too much misinformation in your ramblings to even respond to. you win the prize for the most words about nothing.**************


OMG, What do you mean "weather or not he's a paedophile"....are you suggesting there is a chance he was not sexually attracted to the child he raped 3 times in the park?

You are grasping at straws Erotica, I already provided you with a sound basis for why he "is" by definition a paedophile (DSMIV +Merc), therefore the question isn't "IF" he's a paedophile, rather is why you fail to accept the fact that he is.

OK, how about you explain how this man may "not" be a paedophile, this is provide an alternative motive, (apart from the obvious fact that he was sexually attracted to the child enough to rape her) for him having sexually assaulted the child.

Despite her crying and begging him to stop due to the nature of her genital injuries, he went on to rape her another two times.

Jeeze, he had one heck of a libido for a bloke not sexually attracted to kid, when most normal people would find this sickening.

is there some reason you feel the need to keep posting graphically explicit scenarios about what happened to the girl?