A
atreides
Guest
What studies have you read? Sauce for the goose Mr Saavik.rs said:
From what I have seen the large majority of facts and figures produced by the establishment hardly agree with each other and are often taken only from prison populations focusing on violent offenders, or directly from law enforcement. Essentially we only learn about those who get caught. While some aspects of sexual deviancy fit in with psychopathy, not all of them do. While we can say with some conviction that such behavior is certainly anti-social and may be a factor in considering APD, even Hare moves sexual deviancy off his four factor model, and simply lists promiscuity as a factor in guaging psychopathy but no importance is placed on the types of promiscuity. Though it seems generally accepted that psychopaths don't make adult/child distinctions, they don't have a moral center anyway, which leads to some other questions like, why don't all psychopaths predominantly prey on children? Or exclusively? What is it about their target selection mechanism that causes them to choose from one group to another?
While evaluating the Dutroux case, one can say with some degree of certainty that Dutroux was psychopathic to the extreme, his victimizations took on a sexual form out of function, that is he enjoyed being violent, and was most likely highly paid by organized crime for his efforts. One might be able to theorize that psychopaths manifest their deviancy in any field they enter, not that they particularly seek any one field out, save that it gives them a position of privelege and power.
A psychopath may be an opportunist, he wishes to have an outlet for his deviancy, and it manifests in whatever situation he is in.
As for cases illustrating miscarriages of justice and blatant sensationalism, the Bandy Case, the Friedman case, the Nora Wall case, the instance of a 15 year old girl charged with sexually molesting herself for masturbating and so on and so forth.
While the current story on topic for discussion is stranger than fiction, and I am inclined to believe some of the aspects, at the same time I am wary of allowing it to force an emotional reaction, as it seems to me like a serendipitous event for the PTB, and is most likely being used to screw the bell curve as it were. Pedophilia is a real issue that human beings need to deal with, and writing them off as psychopaths just doesn't add up.
Also one can hardly escape the homophobic uses of pedophilia by fundamentalist christians and neo conservatives. Furthermore, there needs to be a more realistic and educated definition of child, as according to the U.N. a child is anyone under 18 years of age. When you or I say pedophile we understand it under the original meaning, those adults attracted to prepubscent children, while most western countries consider pedophile to indicate any adult attracted to any person under 18 years of age.
The particular case under discussion is an interesting study, and leaves one wondering what really happened, the amount of concrete information given is laffable, so really we would be running around in circles trying to discuss it as no verifiable information is given, I am certain that no real studies or evaluations will be done in respect to this case either, it will simply do its part, and then disappear, like all the others.
As a little summary, the problem is larger than this one story, the golden rule is to never accept second hand information, that is, information that you cannot verify yourself. To allow tainted second hand data to shape your model of the world is directly contrary to the work, to the ideas of objectivity and personal growth and the growth of awareness. It is really important for us to find out why, and understand why, we choose to morally condemn others. We need to discover our own moral centers before we really start diagnosing others for their lack thereof.
