Louis Theroux - A Place For Paedophiles

[Mrs Magpie]

I would also say that when I said it wasn't about the penis, it was about the mind, I did not mean it's a mental illness. I meant really that the biggest sexual organ is the mind. I think it's a mental disorder, but that's not the same as a mental illness.

A lot of what turns people on is fixed in childhood. If your first sexual arousal is because you are being sexually abused, that can warp the way you feel about sex forever. This does not put the blame on the abused, arousal is a physiological reaction that is not easily controlled which is why the abused child feel that it is somehow their fault. It isn't.

 

[Mrs Magpie]

That is what really pisses me off about a "person" on here who wants them all hung drawn and quartered.

Well quite. There was an awful incident here some years ago when someone (permabanned) said all people who didn't want paedophiles burnt at the stake or something were child abusers.
A number of people who had that stance of non-witchhunt were abused children and a lot of children don't tell because of the 'witch hunt' mentality and they may well love their abusers (a father, a brother or whatever) but just want them to stop abusing.
The hysteria around child abuse makes a lot of abused children suffer in terrified silence because they don't want their house torched and their dad to be beaten to death by a baying mob.

 

[frogwoman]

Well quite. There was an awful incident here some years ago when someone (permabanned) said all people who didn't want paedophiles burnt at the stake or something were child abusers.
A number of people who had that stance of non-witchhunt were abused children and a lot of children don't tell because of the 'witch hunt' mentality and they may well love their abusers (a father, a brother or whatever) but just want them to stop abusing.
The hysteria around child abuse makes a lot of abused children suffer in terrified silence because they don't want their house torched and their dad to be beaten to death by a baying mob.

It also puts distance between "us" and "them" (paedophiles). the reality is a paedophile can be anyone - and most abuse happens in the home and all the hysterical crap is helping to actually obscure that fact

so actually its contributing to the problem ...

 

[Mrs Magpie]

Exactly frogwoman. I worked with someone who turned out to be a child abuser. He was great with kids and was a 'nice bloke'. Which is why he was undiscovered for so long because he wasn't an ugly social misfit with two heads.....

 

[Mrs Magpie]

Actually, I think the point where I sussed he might be a child abuser was when I overheard him make a joke about how he had been abused and that it was somehow a positive experience.

 

[Mrs Magpie]

Right, I'm off to bed, this thread has made me stay up past my bedtime, and I didn't even see the TV programme! Night all, sleep well.

 

[Mrs Magpie]

Actually before I turn in.....as many of you know I'm a big fan of restorative justice because I've seen it work....here's some food for thought....

http://www.restorativejustice.org.uk/?Past_Events:RJC_Conference_2002:-Circles_of_support

 

[JWH]

Louis is so good because he manages to get the truth out of people who would otherwise be very restrained or defensive in their interviews...

Meh - I disagree. Theroux is a big fat puff of air. His speciality isn't sensitively nudging the truth out of hesitant people, it's hanging around people (sometimes desperately needy people) and giving them enough rope to hang themselves with. He's not as much faux naif as just shallow.

 

[bemused]

Whilst not disagreeing with what you say the problem is where do you draw the line then ?

and if for arguments sake it's more in the way of being a type of sexual orientation for some at least should they then be locked away for the protection of others ?

They aren't being detained because of their orientation they are being detained because of the risk they present being unable to control their impulses. The risk that serial sexual predators present requires something along the lines of what was shown in the program.

 

[weltweit]

So is anyone here in favour of Megans law.

Is that right its Megans law here in the UK and something else in the USA or have I got that cockeyed.

As I understand it, the right for the community to know who is living in their midsts in the way of sex offenders.

 

[bemused]

So is anyone here in favour of Megans law.

Is that right its Megans law here in the UK and something else in the USA or have I got that cockeyed.

As I understand it, the right for the community to know who is living in their midsts in the way of sex offenders.

I'm torn about that one, but I would like to know if convicted sex offenders lived near me and my family.

 

[weltweit]

The thing is, what would you realistically do differently?

 

[weltweit]

Where I used to live in Essex, some of the locals decided there was a paedophile living in their midsts. Some of the mums took up residence at the entrance to his estate with banners saying "paedo out" and the like, kids went round and smashed all the windows in his flat, later when he was out for a mo they went inside and trashed the place, eventually the police had to take him away for his own protection.

And I am still not sure that he was even a convicted paedophile.

 

[bemused]

The thing is, what would you realistically do differently?

I think is would be people hyper sensitive to their children's behaviour, but I also think it would alter the behaviour of the offender. Ultimately I think their are people too dangerous to be let out, the idea of prison hospital seems a good one to me.

 

[Treacle Toes]

So is anyone here in favour of Megans law.

Is that right its Megans law here in the UK and something else in the USA or have I got that cockeyed.

As I understand it, the right for the community to know who is living in their midsts in the way of sex offenders.

Sarah's law here?

 

[weltweit]

I think is would be people hyper sensitive to their children's behaviour, but I also think it would alter the behaviour of the offender. Ultimately I think their are people too dangerous to be let out, the idea of prison hospital seems a good one to me.

But I am already sensitive to my kids behaviour and don't let them spend time with strangers until I have gotten to know them reasonably well. I think the majority of abuse goes on within families rather than the stranger danger which people seem to get most excited about.

That (within families) means I am probably more likely to put my kids at risk with firm family friends than I am with strangers.


eta: Surely the statistics mean that we should be looking after our children as if there were sex offenders around, because there are! Rather than having to know precisely which person it is we should simply know, they are about, always.

 

[JWH]

Sarah's law here?

"Megan's law" is a semi-formal name given to US state laws that disclose the home address of certain convicted sex offenders to the public. IIRC (and I am not promising), the provisions vary between states: in some places, the cops will go around putting up flyers and in other places, it's just up to the citizen to look online. Not all sex offenders are listed on public registers.

You can see the California example here: http://www.meganslaw.ca.gov/Search.aspx?lang=ENGLISH Try entering a common name like "Smith", "Jones" or "Hernandez", or entering a valid ZIP code (90210, of course).

Sarah's Law is the Sun-approved suggestion to have similar laws in the UK. I am not convinced it's a great idea, but am open to persuasion.

 

[butterfly child]

It's the same over here. Felcham Young Offenders Unit.

Is that some attempt at humour?

If so..... lol.

If not, it's Feltham. Felt-ham, or Felth-ham, if you are posh.

And it's a whole prison, not a unit.

 

[trashpony]

Oh, I am with you entirely there. I think a lot of paedophiles are genuinely remorseful and they do know that its wrong, a lot of them are probably also a bit subnormal intellectually as well.

On what basis are you saying that? I don't think many of them are at all. Surely that's why they still carry on offending, because they convince themselves the children they abuse want to be abused

 

[purplex]

I think programs that leave the impression that once the pedophile within gets out its out forever do not further the discussion. They leave the viewer with an assumption that all pedos will reoffend.
So to take a few high profile examples graham rix and bill wyman will have further relationships (sexual or otherwise) with underage girls and langham and townsend will not only be downloading child porn again but will definitely go on to abuse kids.
That may well be happening, but I suspect it isnt.
Rather than being helpful programs that leave the impression that pedophilia is an untreatable lifelong condition probably do more harm than good.
Yes Im sure there are some who do reoffend, but does treatment fail in all cases? If so who is challenging the effectiveness of the treatments? What are the recidivism rates?
I doubt that everyone goes on to reoffend, for those that are released what support facilities are made available to them outside prison? Would more facilities help prevent further abuse?
The discussion really needs to be widened IMO.

 

[frogwoman]

On what basis are you saying that? I don't think many of them are at all. Surely that's why they still carry on offending, because they convince themselves the children they abuse want to be abused

I mean the ones who are in prison on therapy programmes like this, not necessarily the ones who are still doing it ...

 

[bemused]

But I am already sensitive to my kids behaviour and don't let them spend time with strangers until I have gotten to know them reasonably well. I think the majority of abuse goes on within families rather than the stranger danger which people seem to get most excited about.

That (within families) means I am probably more likely to put my kids at risk with firm family friends than I am with strangers.


eta: Surely the statistics mean that we should be looking after our children as if there were sex offenders around, because there are! Rather than having to know precisely which person it is we should simply know, they are about, always.

I'm talking about the very dangerous serial offenders. When Craig Sweeney is released I'd really want to know if a man who broke into a house to abduct a child was living near me.

Although I'm not convinced that someone who abused their own children or children of friends is beyond attempting to do it to one they don't know.

 

[madzone]

Good reason to watch

I'm not sure. I'm torn between this and Nuts in May. And bed ...

Nuts in May??? When/what channel was that on?

 

[Espresso]

Oh, I am with you entirely there. I think a lot of paedophiles are genuinely remorseful and they do know that its wrong, a lot of them are probably also a bit subnormal intellectually as well.

Im not saying "hang em/kill em all!" whatever, im not that type of person, but i do think that there are sadistic offenders who enjoy inflicting pain rather than just a socially/sexually inadequate person who cant have real relationship, and im not quite sure what you can do with people who know what they are doing is wrong and don't care, or enjoy the fact they're hurting someone else

I've never heard that before. I don't see why that would be the case. Surely anyone who is attracted to anyone can be of any level of intelligence? If education could change what you thought about sexual matters, there'd never be any illegal sexual behaviour among the educated classes. And that's certainly not the case.

Maybe a stupid paedophile is more likely to get caught than a clever one, but I'd say that's about it.

 

[trashpony]

Nuts in May??? When/what channel was that on?

BBC4. Although the cringeworthiness of NiM is almost as bad as the disturbing paedophiles ...

 

[Cloo]

I watched some of this... it's something of an issue at the moment, as a friend of the family is about to come out of prison after a low-grade sexual offence against a minor. I'm not sure what it was, I'm not sure of the age of the child.

This guy had got through life totally blameless, never been in trouble until this (he's in his early 70s now) - he's been in for nearly two years and been through a programme to examine his actions. As far as I can tell, they occurred while he was drinking and depressed - I don't believe he has disclosed any other sexual behaviour/thoughts towards minors, although whether he actually has or not is another question. He will be on the child sex offenders list, which I guess would make others class him as a paedophile if they were to know about it, even though I don't believe he should be classed as one if this was an isolated incident.

My mum is letting him stay at her house when he comes out, because it's near the probation centre where he'll have to report. He's been through a programme and is truly devastated by what he's done. My mum and another friend met with him at his probation meeting where the officer said he wished the other people he saw had support like this, as it meant he wouldn't be seeing them again as he too often did - and he was confident our family friend wouldn't be coming back there.

It makes you think about the individuals behind the stark label of 'sex offender', that's for sure.

 

[Rollem]

He will be on the child sex offenders list, which I guess would make others class him as a paedophile if they were to know about it, even though I don't believe he should be classed as one if this was an isolated incident.

so coz he only did it once, he's not a paedophile

i watched teh programme and could not make up my mind. I think my overwhelming view is that whilst some of the men seemed truly sorry, i dont think they can ever be "rehabilitated" personally. alot seemed to still hold on to their 'reason / excuse' for their behaviour, however small and insignifcant they tried to make it.

 

[Espresso]

He will be on the child sex offenders list, which I guess would make others class him as a paedophile if they were to know about it, even though I don't believe he should be classed as one if this was an isolated incident.

That's an interesting thought - how many offences do you think someone should have committed before they're classed as a sex offender?

 

[zenie]

Watched bits of it and couldn't actually watch it all the time.

I thought the whole system where the men were released from prison but then shafted off to a mental hospital pretty bad tbh. I couldn't imagine that happening here, think it'd go against human rights laws wouldn't it? You go to prison OR you go to a mental hospital, has to be one or the other really. How do they decide which pedophiles go there after prison and which don't? And of the 70% that are refusing treatment, how many think they don't have a problem, and how many don't CARE that they have a problem and are willing to reoffend?

Can pedophiles be rehibilitated? I don't know, I don't know how something can be seen as acceptable to someone on one day, can now be seen as unacceptable with rehabilitation? If someone couldn't control themselves on one (or numerous) occasions with children/minors, then how can we as a society be sure that they can control themselves in future?

I'm not sure that 'removing the risk' really works either, you come across kids ALL the time.

I also wonder where the distinction between pedophile or sex offender comes? And would you willingly want your kids to be around either?

 

[Sadken]

you come across kids ALL the time.

Well, speak for yourself. My conscience is clean.

Good show as always, good idea-ish and tricky morality all round, really. Ideally, the aim should be full rehabilitation but, ultimately, people will not accept that now and probably won't do for another X years, till the remaining humans left on Earth decide that they can overlook the crimes committed by schedule 1 sex offenders, so along as they are prepared to muck in with scavenging and running recon missions on what used to be Tescos.