On Tue, 18 Nov 2008 00:10:36 -0800, Brandon D Cartwright wrote
(in article <qct4i4hslkcmcklbair2po2knfi3rjtg7v@4ax.com>):
> On Mon, 17 Nov 2008 03:10:53 -0800 (PST), danielleeds69
> <danielleeds69@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>> He said his daughter went to church Sunday after the incident.
>>
>> What's that have to do with the incident?
>>
>>> that man was a rapist, pure and simple, the girl was not a child.
>>>
>> Good point, Wonderer, and furthermore, she was neither missing, nor
>> exploited (I am referring to the website Cartwright provided).
>>>
>>>> http://www.ncmec.org/missingkids/servlet/NewsEventServlet?LanguageCou...
>>>
>>>> There are those who maintain that there is a distinction between viewing
>>>> child pornography and molesting a child.
>>
>> Because there is a distinction.
>> The molester may or may not film the act (participate in child
>> pornography), but does not necessarily and simultaneously view child
>> pornography. It is a well-known fact that possessors/viewers of
>> various forms of pornography do not necessarily commit criminal acts.
>> the same applies to owners of firearms or explosives. I once used to
>> make frictional impact explosives (of potassium perchlorate and
>> amaphorous red phosphorous), but it does not mean that I had the
>> intent to murder people by such means; it was just fun!
>>
>>>> This is another fallacy. Viewing these images is often the first step in
>>>> the timeline that eventually leads to the sexual victimization of a child.
>>
>> An unqualified and unfounded statement. Does this "timeline" parallel
>> perchance that of experimentation with marijuana leading to the
>> inevitable use of heroin? I would suggest at least substituting
>> "often" for "sometimes".
>>
>>>> Dr. Andres Hernandez, Director of the Sex Offender Treatment Program at
>>>> the Federal Correctional Institution at Butner, North Carolina, has
>>>> treated several hundred inmates who were convicted of child pornography
>>>> crimes. He conducted a study which found that 85% of child pornography
>>>> offenders had, in fact, committed contact sexual crimes which were
>>>> unknown to law enforcement.
>>
>> Does anybody smell job security wages? What would happen to the
>> American Cancer Society if a cure were discovered? What is the
>> definition of "sexual crime"? Does it necessitate crimes against
>> children? Read the above again! More closely!
>> They may, regardless of age, include (but not be limited to): incest,
>> indecent exposure, prostitution or solicitation, rape, (sexual)
>> harassment, stalking, inappropriate advances (a vast grey area), and
>> in some places, sodomy or oral sex. Did the aforementioned offenders
>> also possess other (non-child) pornography? Though "contact" has here
>> been specified, Keep in mind that various factors which can make you
>> an accessory to any of the above (even witness to) can by law make you
>> "guilty of a sexual crime." (have readers not already inferred that
>> the British and Americans are highly sexually inhibited,or even
>> squeamish?)
>>
>>>> Dr. Hernandez asserts, that, while there needs to be further study, his
>>>> observations indicate that "[child pornography] offenders are far more
>>>> dangerous to society >>than we previously thought."
>>
>> Note: whilst making an unqualified, vague statement, admits that
>> "there needs to be further study." However, the title "Doctor" =
>> "unquestioned authority". Damn! I knew I should have got a doctorate
>> in something!
>>
>>>> This is supported by another study, published in the Journal of Abnormal
>>>> Psychology, which suggests that child pornography offending is a stronger
>>>> diagnostic indicator of pedophilia than is sexually offending against
>>>> child victims.
>>
>> Note: "suggests" is a term to be taken seriously . . . at face value,
>> and no more! Many "suggestions" have been made by numerous agencies
>> from various fields, many of which have been later proven unfounded as
>> facts, yet acceptable as mere "suggestions". As a reference: Look at
>> the plethora of unproven "suggestions" over decades, made by medical
>> professionals and pharmaceutical agencies regarding use of supplements
>> and marijuana. How many of those "suggestions" are facts?
>>
>> Has anybody here actually met a doctor of abnormal psychology? Very
>> creepy people indeed!
>>
>>>> It is also known that images of child pornography are used in the
>>>> victimization of children to desensitize them to sexual exploitation.
>>>> They are key to the
>>>> grooming process used by offenders to break down a child's natural
>>>> inhibitions and defense mechanisms.
>>
>> The above -without the implicit absolutes- may certainly be true, and
>> in many cases, is. It is likewise often used upon adults of either
>> gender, by either gender. Such an attempt was made upon me by persons
>> of both genders, most after I turned 18. Furthermore, note "a child's
>> natural inhibitions and defense mechanisms." May it therefore be
>> inferred that a "child" is not such an idiot as we would presume? That
>> a child has an intuitive sense of another's intent to do harm or good?
>>
>>>> Let me close by reminding you what the Supreme Court held in the Ferber
>>>> case: "The value of permitting live performances and photographic
>>>> reproductions of children engaged in lewd sexual conduct is exceedingly
>>>> modest, if not de minimus."
>>>
>>>> The value of our children is not de minimus. They deserve the best
>>>> protection our laws can provide.
>>
>> Atwell-Davis here reminds the Senate of a Supreme Court ruling that is
>> countermand to her agenda! Why would she do that? Her reminder is
>> sadly followed by a whimpering statement. I mean to say that it was
>> not a very convincing closure, furthermore, she compares apples
>> (permission of the aforementioned) to oranges (the value of children
>> themselves). Question: Is the value of children higher than that of
>> women? Of men? Of Asians? Of Muslims? Are not all people equal?
>>
>>>> Thank you.
>>
>> You are welcome.
>>
>> Allow me to emphasise here that I do not by any means condone (i.e. am
>> opposed to) crimes against and/or abuse of children and other people,
>> including elderly, handicapped (physically, mentally or emotionally)
>> and infirm or otherwise incapacitated individuals! I am in fact highly
>> sensitive to such abuses, having been personally involved (rather the
>> instigator thereof) in the rescue of a victim of incestuous sexual
>> abuse, only to see the victim unfortunately later recant in the court
>> of law, and, of course only to return to the same situation. It not
>> only infuriated me, but haunted me for years. The perpetrator remains
>> alive and well, and guilt-free (please see Hare's psychopathy check-
>> list, available via Wikipedia.).
>> Furthermore, I have spoken with a released "sexual offender" who
>> became such immediately after his 18th birthday, and who, unlike the
>> actual rapist in the incident, had no physical contact with the
>> victim, and even talked the inebriated rapist out of murdering the
>> victim, who was later persuaded by the prosecuting attorney to change
>> her statement against him anyway, despite having saved her. Because he
>> cooperated with the other guy in order to save her life, he became an
>> accessory, and therefore himself a "rapist", with the permanence of a
>> tattoo. He has sworn a personal oath never to interfere in anther
>> crime, including impending murder, because that victim turned against
>> him. Very sad. Yes, people lie, but I am familiar with this person's
>> integrity, family, actual history, the police reports, court case, and
>> so forth. This ex-convict, being a "rapist" as such, had therefore
>> been confined with "others of his kind", hence had the opportunity to
>> make the acquaintance of many sexual offenders. Though many of them
>> had committed crimes against children (one even murdered his victim
>> and had no remorse), not one was an actual "paedophile". (i.e. one
>> who cares for children) Yes, Mr. Cartwright, I have been doing some
>> research and investigation, and these interviews have proved to be
>> quite fruitful. In every case -albeit only of which my interviewee was
>> aware- the age of the victim was not so much of a concern as was the
>> accessibility to and the vulnerability of the victim! Very
>> interesting, that one hears scant -if any- news regarding sexual
>> predation at nursing homes and such, despite its prevalence! Hmm. . .
>>
>> Additionally, as with various other "sexual deviations, such as S&M,
>> bondage, and such, fantasy does not necessarily lead to acting out
>> said fantasies (read about Anne Rice). Much documentation attesting to
>> this may quite easily be obtained by the public . . .so far. I have
>> likewise done considerable research, insomuch as to question owners of
>> some child pornography throughout Eastern and Western Europe -some of
>> it incidental, i.e. acquired unintentionally; several possessors
>> thereof have "normal sexual relationships", and not one, to the best
>> of my knowledge, has engaged in the sexual abuse of a child.
>>
>> Before making my closing statement, I would like to make a point as
>> regards the "innocence" of a child; many of us have, especially as
>> children fallen for the "knee/kick-to-the-groin" manoeuvre, my point
>> being that not all children are so "innocent" as the title to which
>> they so readily adhere, and everything must be taken into context. I
>> have been subjected throughout my life to "unlikely" (impossible)
>> advances by "innocent children", and I assure you that they knew full
>> well what they were doing! Does this mean that one necessarily has
>> license to proceed further? Obviously not; however this does -at least
>> for myself- confirm without a shadow of a doubt that child sexuality
>> does exist to some extent, whether or not we choose to recognise its
>> presence. Please bear with me, as I clarify further that I have NEVER
>> made advances upon a female regardless of age, but have been (in past)
>> subject to advances even by young girls.This is neither contrived, nor
>> 'fantasy"! It just happened, and of their own volition. I have never
>> been attracted to children in that way, so why would an 8-year old
>> girl suddenly get the idea to kiss a 22-year-old guy? To this day I
>> have no idea, but I can only say that it was absolutely unsolicited,
>> and I was weirded out. But again, my simple posit is that children
>> experience sexuality at various stages in life, irrelevant to
>> chronological age.
>>
>> As for Mr. Cartwright: I foolishly followed his advice, thus
>> alienating myself from someone most dear to me. This resulted in her
>> resentment towards me, low marks in school, delinquency, truancy, and
>> spending evenings with an older boyfriend, whom her mother doesn't
>> know.
>
> Quit stalking her if you have a grain of sense left...
>
> You are wildly overestimating your influence to make you feel better..
>
>
>> Her mother in fact has never even met his parents! PLEASE do not
>> follow any advice from Mr. Cartwright! Doing so led me to months of
>> depression and later alcoholism, and I am currently in recovery
>> therapy.Meanwhile, as a result of following his advice, there is
>> someone special who feels abandoned because of my foolish error. God
>> help her! I shall never forget her pained and sorrowful expression,as
>> her mother carted her off n the back of the truck, and I refused to
>> return her "goodbye" and "I love you". One of the greatest mistakes I
>> had ever made was to heed the advice of Mr. Cartwright and relinquish
>> the girl back to her abusive mother!
>
> Well look at it this way...you *didn't* have sex with your nine year
> old niece and haven't been sentenced to twenty-five years in prison
> for doing so..and haven't been beaten to death by a fellow inmate..
>
> Get a clue...it's you who misses her and in your heart of hearts you
> know the relationship was getting real sick and had to stop..
>
> You actually did the decent thing for once in your life..now own that
> and be proud of it and hold your head up high!
>
> You don't have to beat yourself up or hide in a bottle..
>
> Clearly you didn't follow the advice ..at least the part about seeing
> a doctor or counselor you trusted to talk over *YOUR* feelings ..
>
> I suggest you rectify that ASAP....
>
> You need a little more that AA or any other twelve step program can
> give you..
>
> One day you will realize maybe what a narrow escape you had
>
>
>>
>> As regards any crimes and "wars against thereof, let us take a moment
>> to consider a a quote by Ralph Waldo Emerson: "What you resist
>> persists". Does this not have any pertinence as regards the war
>> against terrorism, the war against drugs, the war against . . .(fill
>> in the blanks)? What if, instead of "resisting/fighting"', we were to
>> pursue that which we truly desire? Do not fight/struggle against that
>> which you do not desire, but fully and consciously intend for that
>> which you DO desire!
>
> Nope Emerson would certainly have told you to keep your hands off kids
> and your dick in your pocket..
>
>
>
My two cents worth: This is bad advice.
If I were going to seek out the help of some sort of therapist or counselor,
I would not (REPEAT NOT) discusss "...YOUR feelings..." In most venues the
therapist is required by law to report the client and most therapists happily
do so, even when there has been no criminal activity.
Worse yet, most skilled therapists can elicit a report of molestation from a
young child. It is not the difficult to plant ideas and particularly when
you tell the person, "...you may not remember this, but that doesn't mean it
didn't happen..." Indeed people who are molested, raped or attacked often do
supress their memory of the event...read PTSD literature if you question
that.
Tread carefully here in substance abuse programs as well.
Do not confess to so-called 'black-out' drinking (or drugging). It is a
deadly combination. The "victim" doesn't remember what happened because
he/she is 'burying it' and the perpetrator doesn't remember because he/she
has "black out" intoxication...who's to say what, if anything, happened?
The therapist or NCMEC are always happy to fill in the blanks.
Perhaps some folks can suggest ways around this. Anonymous therapy might be
one. I don't know how that would work.
|
|