Are the very sad after-effects of child sexual abuse caused by society rather than the abuser? In many Society’s children having sex is normal and causes no Psychological determent. However in Society’s where child sex is considered the lowest of the low the victims can develop a string of disorders. Some so bad that they often lead to suicide. I normally load my posts to cause a reaction but for this one I am aware it is a controversial subject and I do not in anyway promote child sex. But I believe this is an important subject as it uncovers the role between society and the individual. If anyone finds this subject triggering please make it known so that support can be given.
A society is made up of you and me. We determine what is the 'common good' by consensus. If something appears wrong to us and we agree together that it is wrong then to persist with the wrong thing would mess us up because we believe it to be wrong. Now add a few of 'them' to you and me, get us all together and work out what the general consensus is. The general consensus will be the majority of opinions that do not contradict the definition of right and wrong between themselves. It stands to reason that any person who held an opinion that their rights had been violated according to the general consensus would exhibit signs of emotional turmoil whilst fighting with the fact that their rights had not been upheld. The person violating the other person's rights knows the general consensus among them at the time that they violate them. It is not the general consensus that is at fault then but that which violates another's rights knowing they are violating anothers rights because they are fully aware of the other people's sensitivities that lead to their consensus. peace c20
I've often wondered just how much "child sexual abuse" goes on and no one ever knows about it ....AND.... the people involved actually enjoyed it? Oh, I know, it seems abhorrent to most of us, but think about it ....do we really know? And if we don't, and it's more prevalent than we think, perhaps only a small percentage of those involved are "harmed"? Perhaps it was/is all a fun, enjoyable little game they play?? And we only hear about the traumatic events, not the fun, enjoyable ones? Baron Max
My personal distaste for sex with anyone who is immature is a much greater compelling force than the rule of law over the particular thing. Projectile vomiting tends to put a damper on the whole evening. I vote that society causes the problems. I also do not want to promote sex with children, but society seems incapable of forbidding it without causing severe damage to the ones who we are supposedly protecting from it. I'm betting that it's the damaged ones who go on to become rapists and rapist/murderers.
Our society forbids it because it is unnacceptable to our particular 'culture'. When you are forced to accept something unnacceptable to 'you' then the damage is done. Children who are abused havent taken into account everyone elses opinions when evaluating their own feelings. They just 'feel' violated. If they hadn't been violated, they would still be part of a culture that see's such acts as violation and as adults would still profess such acts as wrong because it is an inherent part of that culture. Cultures dont convert, they just are. The abuser is the one bucking the trend and is not acting in love when they know the person they are abusing 'feels' violated. Again it is the abusers fault that damage is done, not the cultures. peace c20
In what society does children having sex with adults not cause negative psychological effects? Who studied this? I have heard of some pretty abhorant practices in other countries concerning "coming of age" ceremonies. And I have occasionally read an interview of a person who was victimised in these circumstances. I do not remember reading any one of them enjoyed what happened to them. The closest thing they can offer as to why it was ok is that "this is what we do". I guess to state that cannibalistic cultures have no apparent psychological damage from eating people does not prove that eating people is not psychologically damaging. The apparent psychological effect of such a past can be measured in many ways. Slavery is still slavery whether the victim of this practice is aware or not and I tend to categorize child sexual abuse as a kind of slavery. And yes, I think our society does cause some added psychological burdens for the victims of child sexual abuse, but not all of the effects. You have a person whos life experience is based in some ways on what society views as the darkest of all crimes. Look at how many viet nam vets withdrew from society due to a view a portion of society held against the returning vets. Whether or not you agreed with the war does not matter. Society itself burdened the returning soldiers with added psychological issues. Many who returned hated the war and what they had to do. They were drafted and they were also raised in a culture / society that encouraged patriotism and service when your country calls. While not a perfect comparison, it does show simularities. A child raised in a society which one of the mantras is "honor thy mother and father" and "family values" will have similar reactions psychologically as the soldier who "was following orders, or "serving his country, right or wrong" to later find out society has changed its mind, or thats not what society meant in its simplistic messages of "family values". .
Yes. I too would like o know about the societies which apparently condone child sexuality...? thing is, we as adults should surely know the complications of sex. even for the adult mind it can be overwhelming, never mind the devloping child! Yes children are erotic animals, but tis doesn't mean that that means actual sex. you can be erotic but not actually be havingsex. it mans that they are very sensually aware. Someperdatory adults take advantage of this aspect of childhood and groom it abuse. usually horribly ugly old farts mauling over a beatiful child who has no means to dfend itself. makes me wanna puke I understand what you man thoug about--after the event-the culture making such a fuss over it that this 'shaming' will mak child feel even worse
If we were talking about individuals who are not with the mainstream, we would have names for people who only see the traumatic events and not the joyful ones concerning a given subject. Even if we say "neurotic" or "paranoid", even if those are more or less scientific labels, we are still talking about types of people. We think of them differently. Neurotic or paranoid behavior is acceptable when the fearful fantasies are the kind that society accepts. Unfortunately, "society" accepts, with a total lack of criticism, quite a wide range of fearful fantasies and seems quite unable to differentiate rationally between rare and common occurrences. We are supposedly in great fear of a flu epidemic that claimed one human life on this planet just one week. With the assumption that this person had "bird flu" no one is going to check his blood for any poisons even as easily detectable as arsenic. We disable our critical faculties to the point that we cannot recognize whether our suppositions come from tainted sources or make any sense at all. Logic doesn't apply. We put words in the mouths of our witnesses. We disable ourselves from discovering the truth about pretty much any popular hysteria, let alone the hysteria surrounding "child sexual abuse." From one end to the other we use a set of assumptions and a system of thinking that comes from the worst parts of the superstitions of the past, those that inspired the burnings of witches and scientists. On the one hand, we do have a certain richness of culture that comes from those fantasies. On the other hand, enough is enough. We don't know when it's enough. Sick fantasies become our future. We give ourselves horrendous penalties for things that never did happen and probably never will happen, and those who promote this say that it's all justified when some disaster happens somewhere. I think that it would be more appropriate to concentrate on the joy of the life we do have. That's probably what makes me some kind of pervert or psychopath.
Report: Pedophilia more common among 'gays' Research purports to reveal 'dark side' of homosexual culture Posted: April 29, 2002 1:00 a.m. Eastern By Jon Dougherty © 2002 WorldNetDaily.com Child molestation and pedophilia occur far more commonly among homosexuals than among heterosexuals on a per capita basis, according to a new study. http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=27431
As a prison nurse I am faced on a daily basis with all of life miscreants. Without exception the peadophiles I work with are invariably 'straight' and many of them are married. Now I know that this means diddely in the grand scheme of things but all of the British evidence I can access is contrary to the theme of this site. As for the victims it would seem evident that if enjoyment is experienced then it is simply beacause they know no different if young enough. Let's not forget that sexual manipulation is just that. Especially in the case of females where the clitoris is the only known human organ designed specifically for pleasure. I wonder if the thread starter has another agenda? Hey I just wonder ok?
There are many 3rd world nations that permit and even encourage the "arranged" marriage of girls as young as 13! In many areas of India, that is NOT unusual at all, even tho' there are Indian laws against it. I still wonder just how much child sexual activity actually occurs VERSUS the publicized cases of what we call "sexual abuse"? I mean, we hear and read about THOSE cases .....but how many are actually consentual (even tho' the girl is underage!) and is never ever reported and the girl is NOT traumatized by it. I have to think that there are some, if not many. Baron Max
Baron, why don't you use Google and find some sources of information? There are surveys out there. I know and almost every male who logs in here knows that there are 13 year old girls out there that you stay away from for the good and sufficient reason that they hump everything in sight. There are also good reasons why a lot of us should never been seen taking an interest in this subject even under a pseudonym. I'm negative about it. I'm just not negative enough. I've already put in my two cents worth.
Another two cents worth: When it's legal we see it as all right. When it's illegal we see all sorts of things that make it wrong, but we didn't see them when it was legal.
What societies do not see sex with children as bad? Well, I suppose that depends on what age you consider a child. You must also consider different maturity levels in different cultures. Thirteen was mentioned. At thirteen years old a girls is physically mature. In a society in which a thirteen year old is emotionally and intellectually mature, why would sex be forbidden? Hell, even in the US not very long ago many girls were married at thirteen, and I know MANY girls who were sexually active (with boys their own age and older) in this country in the past 10 to 15 years. It may have changed, but I recall reading that thirteen was the cut-off age for sex workers (both pornography and prostitution) in Amsterdam.
Click for some interesting numbers from around the world. There are a few states in the US in which the age of parental consent is 14 years old. Some consider that a child. Apparently the age in Canada is 12 under certain circumstances. Perhaps a Canadian can shed some light on that?
i tell you one thing....temedia confuse 'paedophilia' with sex with 'minors' i have seen this again and again. actually paedophilia means sex with children who are prepubescent in a UK paper-the Daily Mirror- they had on their front page in bold letters tat a certain celebrity, who'd just been released from prison after a string of sex pffences with minors which happened years ago, was a 'PAEDOPHILE'....and they really laid into him inside, in a two page spread.....and it ws 'paedophile' this 'paedophile' that. so i phoned tem and tried to explain that they were confusing the term, and was met with abuse. so i phoned again, and ended up sending the editor a dictionary definition of wht paedophile means, and tellinghim that by using that term to cover sex with minors they were trivializing the very maning of what paedophilia means.....anyway my protest my havemet it some result. i haven't noticed any more of same at least wit that paper, but have heard this confusion in othe media sources personall, as a postpubescent kid i was VERY horny, BUT also VERY naive, and i still dont agree wit adults taking advantage. ie., justifying to themselves ......you know wht i mean
Actually paedophilia isn't sex with pre-pubescents, it is "fantasizing about sex with pre-pubescents". No actions has to be taken to be a paedophile, and paedophilia is not illegal. Acting on those urges is.
Child Offenders More than 6,000 netted in 'Operation Predator,' 40% illegal aliens Posted: October 18, 2005 1:00 a.m. Eastern By Jon Dougherty © 2005 WorldNetDaily.com A federal effort aimed at cracking down on immigrant child sex criminals has resulted in the arrest of more than 6,000 people, officials say. Some 85 percent of those arrested are foreign-born, according to DHS officials; 40 percent are illegal aliens. http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=46889
