Idk man. People who are obsessed about “killing pedophiles” and wears a “shoot your local pedophile” t-shirt are, more often than not, extrememly right-wing anti-LGBT neo-nazis and think leftists and drag queens are, somehow, “pedophiles”.
Pizzagate all over again.
Every time these memes get reposted I can’t help but feel they’re trying to get Q’s Storm or whatever shit going.
This kind of rhetoric doesn’t sit well with me. There is a difference between being a pedophile and abusing children. Pedophilia is a mental disorder and I can imagine that being attracted to children is pretty damn terrible if you’re also trying to do the right thing. I think there needs to be acceptance towards pedophilia (not towards abusing children) so that the affected people feel safe in talking about their condition and get the appropriate help (so that they don’t end up abusing children).
That’s a sane take on a emotional matter. I agree.
We’ve had some success here with a program called “Don’t become a perpetrator”. Pedosexuals (which is the scientific term for people attracted to minors without acting upon their urges) could enter, as long as they hadn’t committed any crime in regards to children or consuming illegal content. They could get psychological help as well as a chemical castration. Preventive approaches like this should be more common.
And here I thought you were going to counter with ahimsa or non-violence by urging violence is wrong. Nope, still lemmy.
Depends. Are we talking paedophile in the sense of Epstein or in the sense of LGBTQ person?
Because right-wingers tend to call people who are not paedophiles paedophiles (very often just LGBTQ people), while protecting actual paedophiles like the republicans who are fighting to keep child marriage legal in the USA.
Yeah, this kind of vague, “kill your local pedophile :)” sentiment is often just an anti-LGBT dogwhistle and makes me uneasy.
If someone is going to post shit like this, and not actively tie it to the very obvious class dynamics of wealthy human traffickers, conservative Christians who promote child marriage, and politicians who protect them (without also being Anti-Semitic), then I just kind of assume it’s a thinly veiled call for violence against queer people
I really hate how right wingers have bastardised the term to mean “LGBTQ people” meanwhile tons of right wingers are actually paedophiles
This is a very obvious trick from the right.
“Kill all pedophiles!”
Yeah most people will say pedophiles are really bad and nobody wants to defend them, so they’ll either agree or let it slide. However, they’re not anticipating the next part
“All trans people are pedophiles!”
“All gay people are pedophiles!”
“All immigrants are pedophiles!”
Once you define a group of people as being subhuman and unworthy of human rights, then there is a strong motivation to expand the definition of that group to include more people that a lot of people don’t like and won’t stick their neck out to support for fear of getting labeled as part of that group and oppressed like them. The circle then just keeps growing as the machine needs more people in the outgroup to oppose. If there is broad consensus that pedophiles (or people who commit any type of crime) are a danger so foul that the people who might commit said crime should be summarily executed to subjected to torture, then oppressed minority groups will just be identified with said crime. Think about how panic about urban theft and murder was used to advance policies that harm racial minorities in the late 20th century, and how panic about “bolshevism” was a major driving force of the Holocaust. Nothing good comes from this path.
However, they’re not anticipating the next part
I think we can easily retort “All pedophile killers are pedophiles!”.
Right, but at this point pedophilia does exist as an actual phenomenon, which the right uses to build a culture of fear and suspicion in which they can frame all their arguments credibly.
Like people are actually worried about child abuse, for many good and bad reasons. So without addressing the fear and the underlying desire for just governance then no amount of political humanism will get through. People are, irrationally, more afraid of pedophiles than they are willing to criticize the cultural implications of the meanings of words.
That’s not your fault, you aren’t creating or reproducing this phenomenon and I largely agree with you. I just think its time to start coming up with better criticisms than trying to poke logical holes. The right is fighting a war and we are having an intellectual debate. I’m a firm advocate for scientific intellectualism, while exploring even philosophical implications of your plans and actions. I think this is logically strong, but practically weak argument.
Depends.
Pedophilia is likely an inherent sexual attraction, much like being straight, or LGBTQ+. It appears that the sexual attraction is not something that the person has control over. There’s no good evidence that it can be changed. Some pedophiles are also sexually attracted to age-appropriate partners, some appear to be exclusively attracted to children. Moreover, it appears to split into nepophilia (infants, toddlers), pedophilia (pre-pubescent children older than toddlers), and ephebophilia (pubescent children and post-pubescent children younger than the legal age of consent).
Epstein appears to have been attracted to post-pubescent girls younger below the age of consent, but he also seems to have had sexual relationships with adult women. E.g., he wasn’t exclusively a pedophile.
Child molestation is a completely different matter. Child molesters can be pedophiles, but they can also be opportunistic sexual predators. A significant amount of child molestation is also incest, e.g., a parent or close relative (almost always male) using a child for sexual gratification because they can (proximity, opportunity), rather than preferring children. Either way, child molesters that sexually abuse children are very high risk offenders; they are often very, very likely to commit the same crime repeatedly.
So, I’d draw the line a line between someone that’s sexually attracted to minors, and someone that acts. The child molester? Yeah, fuck 'em with a chainsaw. Pedophiles that haven’t yet done anything (including grooming!)? No.
Finally, an actual good use of the “chainsaw of bureaucracy”.
But yeah, this needs to be said more.
The problem for me is that it’s hard to see them being more than a potential child molester.
Maybe not so much if it’s like just “the forbidden kink”, but if it’s more of the main show it feels like they’re just so much more likely to do it eventually.
Now I haven’t read any data on it, but it does naturally raise concern to be wary.
But people at large really love an easy target to dump rage on. And I get it, I’ve been in that crowd.
I may have been saddled with a really weird collection of my own kinks, preferences, and desires, but at least all of mine are kid free. And at my age I still call 20-somethings kids.
Well, I understand your emotions but there are more civilized ways to deal with this problem.
The abuser has to pay lifelong alimony to the abused. If the accusation turns out to be false, however, the “abused” has to pay.
This is right, but we have the law to not do it ourselves based on subjective judgement.
Well… while an objective law is important… Don’t get me wrong - if anyone would do anything to my girl I’d personally rip their reproductive organs out and force feed that to them
This is understandable, probably I could do the same if my kids were harmed, however I hold the position that (objectively speaking) the law should deal with this kind of crime.
Beating the shit out of pedophilephiles?
Pedophiles did nothing wrong
Pedocriminals did
What about capitalist, pedophile nazis?
Thanks to the brave, strong internet tough guys at lemmy who totally aren’t pathetic losers overcompensating for something, we have such brilliant hits as
- this
and who knows what else? Time to consolidate & merge all these expressions into one proud circlejerk & achieve great glory.
Being a Nazi is a choice someone actively makes. I don’t think it’s the same with being a pedophile (not defending pedophiles or anything)
I’ve heard people go with the thought that “they wish to cause harm to other individuals, so why should people not cause harm to them?” (For Nazis, obviously). Whether or not I totally agree with that sentiment… I’m not sure.
But comparing Nazis to pedophiles doesn’t work.
Why does this only have 4 pixels?
Sorry but what the actual fuck are these comments???
Lemmy: yeh punch a nazi haha that’s awesome and deserved and cool
Also Lemmy: nooo don’t be mean to pedophiles they’re just misunderstood waaahhh it’s all QAnon propaganda
Fuck anyone who thinks abusing children is fine and normal. Fuck you all so hard to hell. Get the absolute fuck away from my kids.
I’m pretty damn left, but I have zero empathy at all for anyone who is thinking sexual shit about children. I’m livid. Holy shit.
Fuck anyone who thinks abusing children is fine and normal. Fuck you all so hard to hell. Get the absolute fuck away from my kids.
I’m pretty damn left, but I have zero empathy at all for anyone who is thinking sexual shit about children. I’m livid. Holy shit.
Abuse is a choice. Sexual attraction isn’t. You’re worked up about abuse, not about pedophilia.
You’re incorrect. I am disgusted by actual abuse, but I am also legitimately disgusted by the idea of anyone having sexualised thoughts about children. If you can tell me that these people have no control over that then you must be able to comprehend that as a parent I have no control over my protective instincts.
The idea of people who are sexually attracted to my children, or any children, being anywhere in the vaguest vicinity of them triggers very deep instinctual reactions. Whether those people intend to act or not.
You’re incorrect. I am disgusted by actual abuse, but I am also legitimately disgusted by the idea of anyone having sexualised thoughts about children. If you can tell me that these people have no control over that then you must be able to comprehend that as a parent I have no control over my protective instincts.
The idea of people who are sexually attracted to my children, or any children, being anywhere in the vaguest vicinity of them triggers very deep instinctual reactions. Whether those people intend to act or not.
Well, if you’re worried about thoughts, what do you suppose will create a safer environment for your offspring? De-stigmatization of problematic urges, allowing the afflicted to openly participate in society and receive assistance, or active and violent ostracization and persecution, forcing each and every afflicted person into immediate, life-long and hopeless secrecy?
Just like anyone else you have the ability to act against your immediate instincts, because sometimes, as exemplified by the premise of this whole thread, instincts are just shit.
Everyone needs a Boogeyman to hate. Yours are pedophiles, no need to apologize about that one. It still is only a feeling that your brain craves.
As I understand it, pedophilia is just attraction; not taking action. And many people who were abused as children themselves end up developing the condition. I think it is treatable, but probably not “curable” (maybe, IDK).
AFAIK, child molestation victims are not more likely to become pedophiles or molest children; usually they’ve got a lot of PTSD.
The only treatment that’s available is chemical castration (to largely eliminate sexual urges, although that creates a ton of health issues), and therapy that reduces the probability of criminal offenses against children. It’s not treating pedophilia per se, it’s helping people learn to avoid triggers and spaces where they’re likely to feel overwhelmed by sexual impulses. There’s no cure.
Morality is a human construct but sometimes people confuse their morals with the factual information they know which isn’t exactly bad even tho it may sound bad
I still wouldn’t change my opinion tho
I wouldn’t describe the feeling I’m having as my morals. My morals are conscious and deliberate.
Maybe you need to be a parent to understand… It is a visceral, deep in the gut feeling of fury and repulsion and rage.
Isn’t that exactly what i meant in my post?
Yep sorry. Your post is good, and your comment is good.
The other comments just shocked me and I have been reactionary. I should never have strayed into “All” probably.
Who are these 64 people downvoting
We have courts instead of mob justice in civilized societies for good reasons. One of those reasons is that mobs rarely follow due process. Once you create a class of people it is okay to enact mob violence against, all you need to do is start rumors to take out the anyone you don’t like. People of particular political persuasions. People of particular sexualities. People of particular races. “Oh Jim? Yeah, I heard he’s a pedo - lets run him out of town! (plus then he wont be able to open that donut shop that would have competed with mine…)”
TIL there are 64 pedos in lemmy
Pedophiles should be prosecuted in a court of law.
Also, The Bad Place’s shitposting used this as an angle to recruit dummies into the right. Start with a popular statement and then link pedos to LGBT people etc. How subtle the rhetoric is varies, it frequently wasn’t very.
Letting Lemmy develop the same self-righteous and performative circle jerk just isn’t a great idea… Not that’s it stopped any of the other circle jerking.
So, after the first line i totally agree with you
But about that girst line: a lot of pedophiles either are, or are above, the law. So they can’t be meaningfulky prosecuted.
Then beat the heirarchy to death first and go from there.
That is the law though. Law is hierarchy, hierarchy is law.
You take the hierarchy and out; it becomes unrecognizable, it becomes something else.
ANYWHERE with several thousand users will statistically have more pedos than that. It is something that afflicts around 1-5 percent of the population. Just imagine the person most closest to you being a non offending pedo. They might be, no way to find out.
We managed to call it CSAM, why not call the people Childabusers if thats what we call out? After all there are enough people abusing children sexually without having pedophilia.
Thanks for coming to my Tedtalk.
No one’s going to argue that there aren’t going to be edge cases that are hard to criticize, but in general, supporting any kind of systemic vigilante justice always leads incredibly quickly to innocent people getting lynched and cycles of reciprocal violence.
As opposed to supporting the police, which never harms or terrorizes innocent people.
Edge case which is acceptable :
A systemic pedophile who went to pedo Island owned by his best friend is evading justice by literally being the one who appoints judges.
That is a reasonable case for lynching
I heckin’ love the state’s monopoly on violence!
I feel like the phrase “state monopoly on violence” has so many loaded words in it that people see it and assume it’s a bad thing by definition, when in fact it describes a cornerstone of all civilized society.
when in fact
Citation needed
is
What does that even mean?
cornerstone
And here i was thinking this was the hard emotional and cultural labor of communication and coordination. Or maybe you’re just a fascist?
of
Im glad we can find a little common ground. Fully endorse.
civilized
Absolutely not. Almost definitionally not. Unless youre a big anti-civ type with very gross definitions because it disgusts you
society
Kind of feels like its antithetical.
I fuckin’ love performative justice! Let’s virtue signal about killling people doing fucked up shit to children!
Yeah, thats never lead to innocent people being killed on an industrial scale!
The state always maintains a monopoly on violence. Otherwise you’d have a terrorist show up and the state would be unable to stop them, invalidating one of the core purposes of the state which is to provide security.
Provide security for whom?
Well in a democracy, presumably the people who vote for politicians. In a democracy with a constitution that guarantees rights and security for non voters then them as well.
That sounds nice but I don’t think that’s exactly the case in practice. There are often people who the state defends at the expense of others, who will never realistically receive any kind of justice from the state. I think things are also generally much better when these people are scared.
I’m not trying to advocate for violence against anyone specific but sometimes I think it’s best when people stand up for themselves (and the people) to show that they’re willing to enact some kind of justice in a corrupt system. Thinking of vigilantes in general as immoral and barbaric while thinking “democracy” alone can help you just plays into the hands of those who wish to exploit you imo.
Pic unrelated
Change generally comes about from mass mobilization. The French have gotten more concessions from the government and the rich through mass strikes than Americans ever have firing guns. I’m not naiive to the idea that it’s all purely 100% peaceful protest, but one man with a gun rarely makes a significant change in the overall direction compared to hundreds of thousands of people turning out and threatening the economy.
And that’s the thing, the state generally maintains a monopoly on violence against small groups, it’s near impossible for them to threaten violence against the population as a whole without creating a totalitarian state.
At the end of the day guns aren’t going to be what stops injustice, convincing enough people that the injustice is intolerable is.
That’s a quite reasonable response, but I will say that no actual revolution is likely gonna not involve a lot of violence. And yeah… protests are almost always gonna come at the very least with the threat of violence (for a reason). Plus, figures who do something violent that many see as ultimately justified can create awareness that could lead to more pressure on elites.
I just don’t think it’s productive to condemn violence in general. I don’t think violence not done by the state is in itself bad. Obviously a lone wolf going after random people they think deserve it isn’t gonna directly enact real change, but going on about how peaceful you are seems counterproductive.
Mass mobilisation and vigilante justice aren’t mutually exclusive, and I don’t think that’s necessarily a bad thing.
Pic unrelated
That doesn’t require a monopoly, just more force than the terrorist can produce.
It requires not allowing the police to be outgunned by terrorists.
Notice that it was after the LA bank robbery in the 90s, where two guys had tons of body armour and military rifles and outgunned the LAPD with their 6 shooters, that you suddenly saw every single police force across the country militarize and buy assault rifles, body armour, and APCs.
Notice how in the UK their cops still patrol without guns.
The state will always maintain a monopoly on the top level of violence. The idea of gun ownership to oppose the state is laughable. Notice: right now, no gun owners using them to oppose the state.
I agree those people are foolish, but my statement was about the relationship between terrorists and the state.
- A state like the US will always have more firepower than a single terrorist group.
- A population where everyone is armed will also almost certainly have more firepower than a single terrorist group, too.
The power dynamic is between the terrorists and anyone who would oppose them, not just the state. You also reference police, when terrorists are basically always ultimately handled by a military force, which will have a monopoly on violence regardless of how one ignorantly attempts to organize or arm their police.
A population where everyone is armed will also almost certainly have more firepower than a single terrorist group, too.
It will also arm a whole shit of load terrorists, and people just having a bad day.
The power dynamic is between the terrorists and anyone who would oppose them, not just the state.
Yeah, and now you’ve raised the floor massively.
when terrorists are basically always ultimately handled by a military force
[citation needed]
When you want to do violence but it’s generally frowned upon so you have to find a way to justify it
Donald?
Aww come on, let them have their fun! It’s refreshing to see some people acting with a civic mindset!
Not if they aren’t acting on it, geez.
If they woke up one day, realized to their horror they wanted to do some fucked up shit, and then just never did, that’s crappy for them to have to deal with, and they’re a champion for not making it anybody else’s problem.
Plus a lot of child molesters aren’t even attracted to children, just the power and control it gives them.
I think that it’s also the fact that children, due to being inexperienced and lacking knowledge and strength to defend themselves, which makes them easy targets.
Explain how that’s makes it better.
Well, given sufficient leverage, they could sate themselves abusing and damaging adults!
So n9t, like, much better.
I did NOT say or imply that it makes anything better.
In fact, expanding the pool of potential abusers to those that just want power over others makes it worse.
It doesn’t make acting on it in that way any better, because it’s the same thing. Though assuming no action occurs, it’s probably an easier chestnut for a psychiatrist to crack or at least direct to healthier channels.
I always worry about this. Ive got some specific non-vanilla stuff that I didnt ask for and cant change. Lucky for me its nothing illegal or harmful, just non-standard.
It could just as easily have been the bad.
it can also easily become the bad, which is why “i have nothing to hide” morons need to be yanked by the ear
Yeah you can see that with trans people. They’ve always been in kind of danger, and the easy target for the butt of a joke, but they’ve become a political target seemingly out of nowhere.
I’ve seen too much right-wing LGBT = pedophilia propaganda to jump at this one.
Yeah. The criminal justice system doesn’t always get it right, but it’s still a better system than anyone being able to have anyone else lynched by calling them a pedo on unsafe evidence.
Yeah. Which is wrird since our communities tend to be pretty good about taking care of that problem when it surfaces.
