Barbara Amiel responds to Steubenville.

[The Shadow]

to claim that only people from the states would be ignorant is...well.. an ignorant thing to say!

Yes it would.

Which is why I wasn't saying that at all.

[Jaden]

Suppose someone had quoted something Ann Coulter said and I didn't know who she was.* I would do either one of two things; I would politely ask who she was or more likely; I'd do a quick google search and it would take all of five seconds to have my answer. I wouldn't ask "who the hell is she and why haven't I heard of her

And if you had said "Who the hell is she?" you know what I would have done? I would've told you who she was, without making assumptions about your character, and just assumed you were upset by the article and wanted to know who this bitch was. And it would've been a respectful exchange and I wouldn't have thought twice about it, or even considered for a moment that you were being rude or condescending. I wouldn't have felt the need to add social commentary to an innocent question. Even if you did feel the way they responded was tactless and uncalled for, responding to something tactless and uncalled for WITH something tactless and uncalled for is hardly the solution.

[Rageaholic]

And if you had said "Who the hell is she?" you know what I would have done? I would've told you who she was, without making assumptions about your character

Said it better than I could have.

Besides, if someone didn't know who Ann Coulter is, I'd consider them very fortunate.

[Gravekeeper]

I was expressing an irritation that is common among Canadians and other non-US nationalities.

Maybe you should stop speaking for the whole country seeing as I have to keep blowing holes in your theories. There's no reason for them to know who this twat is. Most of us up here don't. She's not even Canadian to begin with. You weren't expressing a "common irritation". You jumped on a weak excuse to be rude and condescending to our neighbours.

Which is very un-Canadian of you. -.-

[Peppergirl]

Gee, shadow. Your reply makes me sooooo glad I sorta stuck up for you. Not.

Seriously, though. Lets try to get back on track and discuss the crazy bitch the OP was referring to, yeah?

[Rageaholic]

Seriously, though. Lets try to get back on track and discuss the crazy bitch the OP was referring to, yeah?

Yeah, she didn't come across as sociopathic as I thought she would. In fact, she had a few good points not related to the case (the war on drugs IS stupid and viewing child pornography isn't the same as making it). But her comments on the steubenville rape is just a fancy way of slut shaming.

[TheHuckster]

Suppose someone had quoted something Ann Coulter said and I didn't know who she was.* I would do either one of two things; I would politely ask who she was or more likely; I'd do a quick google search and it would take all of five seconds to have my answer. I wouldn't ask "who the hell is she and why haven't I heard of her

If you had said that, I would have actually felt fortunate that you hadn't been exposed to Ann Coulter, and wouldn't have thought anything of it.

But, as Gravekeeper and others said, it seems not even all Canadians know who she is so it's pointless to even consider the comments an American-centric issue.

[The Shadow]

Gee, shadow. Your reply makes me sooooo glad I sorta stuck up for you. Not.

Sorry, I didn't notice because it wasn't really clear.

All right I'm sorry everyone, I could have said it differently.

[Aethian]

I think the making of porn has crossed lines since the beginning. Snuff, Incest, Kiddie, Beastiality, and others are all taboo and yet the porn is still made. I believe there are still films that are automatically sent into experts to determine if its legal or not.

I think the crackpot writer ONLY included the idea of kiddie ideals to hide the fact that all she wanted to do was slut shame. But if she started the article out like that she wouldn't have been published as fast. Looking at a few of her other articles she has gotten this almost down to a art. She'll start with something controversial and hidden in there is her real thought blurb.

[MadMike]

OK people, for the second time, can we please get this thread back on topic and knock off the personal attacks? This is really getting annoying.

[Gravekeeper]

I think the making of porn has crossed lines since the beginning. Snuff, Incest, Kiddie, Beastiality, and others are all taboo and yet the porn is still made.

Ehh...small point of contention. The things western civilization considers icky are very recent developments in human history and not even shared by the rest of the world in some cases. Cousin humping for example is common and acceptable in most places once you get off of this continent.

I think the crackpot writer ONLY included the idea of kiddie ideals to hide the fact that all she wanted to do was slut shame.

Yeah, throw in something horrific and the rest of her spiel seems downright acceptable. Use a greater evil to convince you to let the lesser one slide -.-

[Panacea]

The one thing I will half way agree with her on is the child porn. The people viewing it on their computers at home really aren't the problem.

The problem with people who view actual child porn (not child porn art) is they often perpetrate its production. Pedophiles share porn with one another, and gaining trust usually requires producing it yourself.

We should have more programs that help pedophiles deal with their lusts and control them in a healthy way.

We actually had a pedophile call into a talk radio station in our area a few years ago. He talked to the hosts for 3 hours and explained how he was afraid to go to a psychologist or mental health center because he knew he would immediately be added to the sexual predator list. At that moment, a person's life is ruined, so I can understand his fear.

Maybe if there were an anonymous place for pedophiles to go to for help, it might help cut down on the problem.

If a pedophile has actually abused children he deserves to be on such a list. Pedophiles are extremely difficult to treat and even the best of help is usually not effective.

I feel for the guy, but I feel for kids more.

Said it better than I could have.

Besides, if someone didn't know who Ann Coulter is, I'd consider them very fortunate.

Best line of this thread.

I wish I didn't know who she was.

[Gravekeeper]

If a pedophile has actually abused children he deserves to be on such a list. Pedophiles are extremely difficult to treat and even the best of help is usually not effective.

This is where things get a bit muddy though. Much like rape, child abuse is more often a crime of power and control than any actual lust. An actual honest to god uncontrollable lust monster driving around in a van with candy is extremely rare. But that's what everyone immediately pictures in their head.

You literally have t be a sociopath or psychotic to be what everyone envisions a pedophile to be. The straight definition of a pedophile is just someone who is sexually aroused by children. In a vacuum, that person probably isn't going to produce child porn. Because it requires a psychological absence of morality to commit that heinous of a crime.

A pedophile by itself is no more difficult to treat than any other philia. But the social stigma prevents any from seeking that treatment. A pedophile ( or any other potential criminal ) that has control or morality issues is treatable in the same manner as anyone else that has such issues. But again, cannot seek help, which ultimately would lead to a higher risk of offence.

People don't become pedophiles, its likely just something wired in their brain like any other philia. But people DO become child abusers due to issues in their own childhood or other emotional problems. Abuse is a control / power issue. But treating both groups as one in the same prevents any possibility of helping anyone or reducing the chance of said crimes.

Its actually kinda farked up if you think about it. Its more socially acceptable to stumble into a court room drunk, stoned and naked. Proclaim you can't help but fuck every person that will have you, including your dog, and that you're a kleptomaniac whose ruined countless lives and get off on hiding used needles in bulk bins at the grocery store......then it is to go to a psychologist and admit you were turned on by a picture of a child and need help.

[Panacea]

A pedophile by itself is no more difficult to treat than any other philia. But the social stigma prevents any from seeking that treatment. A pedophile ( or any other potential criminal ) that has control or morality issues is treatable in the same manner as anyone else that has such issues. But again, cannot seek help, which ultimately would lead to a higher risk of offence.

The medical and psychological communities disagree with you.

Pedophilia, the sexual attraction to children who have not yet reached puberty, remains a vexing challenge for clinicians and public officials. Classified as a paraphilia, an abnormal sexual behavior, researchers have found no effective treatment. Like other sexual orientations, pedophilia is unlikely to change. The goal of treatment, therefore, is to prevent someone from acting on pedophile urges — either by decreasing sexual arousal around children or increasing the ability to manage that arousal. But neither is as effective for reducing harm as preventing access to children, or providing close supervision. (Harvard Mental Health Letter, 2010)

The issue has long been understood by psychiatrists and psychologists. This isn't about sexual preferences or power/control quite the way homosexuality or rape are. Pedophiles have an abnormal drive to commit these offenses and it is very difficult for them to control their urges. Children are not safe around them.

Sorry about the guy in the earlier report: but he has to be on a sex offender registry. I'll grant you, they are so punitive as to drive sex offenders back into reoffending, and we do need to change how we handle these folks to keep them integrated in society. But we need to keep track of these people as a matter of public safety.

[Gravekeeper]

The medical and psychological communities disagree with you.

No, there is no standardized consensus in the medical and psychological community about this. Do more research. Homosexuality was considered a paraphilia until the mid 70s, early 80s. There is no standardized gauge of paraphilia. Originally a paraphilia required intense, uncontrollable sexual impulses. IE exactly what I was talking about with control or moral impairment.

The issue has long been understood by psychiatrists and psychologists.

No it hasn't. It has and is still an evolving field. In fact there's a lot of complaints and controversy over the definitions and guidelines.

This isn't about sexual preferences or power/control quite the way homosexuality or rape are. Pedophiles have an abnormal drive to commit these offenses and it is very difficult for them to control their urges. Children are not safe around them.

Incorrect. You're generalizing by taking the extreme end of the spectrum and saying that goes for all. It is possible to have a paraphilia and NOT have control or morality issues. In fact most psychologists will define the level of a paraphilia ( optional, preferred or exclusive. ).