Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?
The Internet Your Rights Online News

Internet "Creates Pedophiles" According to "Expert" 548

Brian Ribbon writes "In the latest sensationalist article about pedophiles on the internet, the director of a Spanish vigilante organization has claimed that the internet 'creates pedophiles'. While conflating pedophilia with child sexual abuse, the 'expert' quoted in the article incorrectly states that 'studies show that some pedophiles feel attracted to children from an early age, but the majority of them develop the tendency later on'; he then claims that 'the internet can become a catalyst for people belonging to the latter group.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Internet "Creates Pedophiles" According to "Expert"

Comments Filter:
  • by dryeo ( 100693 ) on Monday February 11, 2008 @03:37PM (#22382304)
    They're making the common mistake of thinking paedophilia includes young adults (people who are physically mature but below the age of consent) when really it means adults being attracted to prepubescent children.
    A 15 year old going with a 13 year old is not paedophilia. At that a 50 year old going with a mature 13 year old is not paedophilia. While in our culture it is not right, lots of cultures it is more normal.
    A 13 year old going with a 10 year old is paedophilia, just as much as 50 year old going with a 10 year old.
    Personally I'm against calling young adults who have sex together paedophilia and even older adults going with very young adults, while not right and often should be illegal, is not the crime of paedophilia.
  • by veganboyjosh ( 896761 ) on Monday February 11, 2008 @03:49PM (#22382458)
    Search for "reaction videos 2 girls 1 cup" on youtube, and you'll get some pretty funny clips, one is someone's grandmother they coerced into watching.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 11, 2008 @03:52PM (#22382494)
    This poster is correct, which is why people like my FBI friend who worked kiddie-porn enforcement (before he had to get out of it because it was too disturbing even for him) told me they always monitor, but when they see new content appear they go after everyone involved like crazy.
  • by davidwr ( 791652 ) on Monday February 11, 2008 @04:01PM (#22382606) Homepage Journal
    The current psychiatric definition [] of a pedophile in the USA is:

    A. Over a period of at least 6 months, recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors involving sexual activity with a prepubescent child or children (generally age 13 years or younger).

    B. The person has acted on these urges, or the sexual urges or fantasies cause marked distress or interpersonal difficulty.

    C. The person is at least age 16 years and at least 5 years older than the child or children in Criterion A.

    Note: Do not include an individual in late adolescence involved in an ongoing sexual relationship with a 12- or 13-year-old.
    13 and 10, no. 16 and 10, yes.

    The point isn't so much "is it pedophilia" but "is it a violation of your society's morals AND is there a minor involved" OR "is it a violation of your society's morals AND is either party realistically incapable of consent?" Arguing over pedophilia becomes an argument over semantics.

    In America, a 20 year old who has sex with a mature 14 year old who is clearly capable of consenting is still violation of society's morals in most cases. This is not the case in some other countries.

    In America, anyone having sex with someone stone-cold drunk is also considered a moral violation, and that person is clearly incapable of consenting.
  • by randyest ( 589159 ) on Monday February 11, 2008 @04:06PM (#22382656) Homepage
    What I find so interesting is how people on Slashdot are so willing to dismiss any data that they don't believe.

    You might have a point if any actual data were presented in the article. Unfortunately none were, so until something more concrete than "says Mr. Smith from Save the Children" or "according to uncited figures claimed by Mr. Jones" arises, we'll have to "circle the wagons" to refute the unsubstantiated FUD.
  • by ta bu shi da yu ( 687699 ) * on Monday February 11, 2008 @04:55PM (#22383260) Homepage
    P.S. DOCS is the Dept of Community Services. Do your own research before spouting off in future.
  • Re:Um (Score:3, Informative)

    by hairyfeet ( 841228 ) <bassbeast1968 AT gmail DOT com> on Monday February 11, 2008 @07:51PM (#22385402) Journal
    I can tell you from experience that they are using tactics that would be called entrapment in real life.True story---About ten years ago I was a mod on a chat room me and some of the guys had set up to help folks with windows problems.This was the era of Win9X and "dll hell" and sitting at the shop waiting on a reinstall I didn't have anything else to do.Now remember this is a chat room for WINDOWS ERRORS,not sex or anything like that.So I walk this "14 yr old" through fixing a vxd error,common at the time.The 14 yr old then starts hitting on me HARD,really nasty stuff,and making it clear she wanted to hook up.Finally I told her to come back in 15 years since I don't date anyone under 30.She comes on and says she wants to "thank me" because she works for scottsdale pd catching child abusers.I told her that what she was doing WAS NOT catching child abusers,but in fact entrapment,and I banned her I.P.So I can tell you from experience they are using entrapment to catch these guys,and if it was anywhere but the net this kind of crap would not hold in court.

    I also think we should separate child abusers from the socially/sexually retarded.Another true story--A guy was busted in class last year for a kiddie pr0n screensaver and sentenced to 25-life.This guy would literally freak out if you bumped into him and had no clue how to interact with other folks.I read somewhere that anywhere from 40-75% of those busted for having kiddie pr0n are just like that guy.One I even read about had had no contact with the outside world for over 5 years! These kinds of folks don't need to be locked up for decades(at my expense) what they need is intensive therapy to teach them how to deal with other people.And from what I understand it is easy to tell the difference.The predators are looking for jobs where they can have child contact,like one of the above posters said about Chuck E. Cheese.The socially and sexually retarded AVOID contact whenever possible-they work alone,never go out,don't have any friends,etc.The study I read said a 90%+ cure rate for those types and the ones that relapsed didn't actually touch any children but just went looking for more pr0n.I personally would rather have those types treated as opposed to jail where they will simply learn to be a better criminal.Anyway my .02 on the subject.

Nothing is finished until the paperwork is done.