Sexuality and Poverty

[Mountain Lion]

Oppressive norms around sexuality can intensify poverty and inequality. But how can sexual fulfilment and autonomy improve well-being, equality and justice?

The following resources have been selected from resources which have been summarised and included in the Siyanda database on sexuality and poverty:

- Development with a Body - Sexualities, Development and Human Rights, Cornwall, A., Correa, S., and Jolly, S. (eds), April 2008
This book draws together contributions from participants at two events to debate the linkages between sexuality, human rights and development. What's needed, the contributors argue, are efforts by progressive development actors to reclaim sexuality as an important area of human experience.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

- SexPolitics: reports from the front lines, Parker, R., Petchesky, R. and Sember, R, January 2008
This book, comprising ten case studies from eight country settings and two institutional ones (the United Nations and the World Bank), sheds lights on how and why gender and sexuality are being used in political power struggles within and across countries and institutions.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

- Whose Sexualities Count: Poverty, Participation and Sexual Rights, The Institute of Development Studies (IDS), November 2007
This paper asks: what do sexuality, sexual rights and sexual pleasure have to do with citizenship, participation and rights?
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

- Gender and Sexuality Cutting Edge Pack (CEP) (in English, French, and Spanish), BRIDGE, December 2006
An information pack with an overview, tools and articles on gender, sexuality and sexual rights.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

- Action Plan for Sida's work on Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Issues in International Development Cooperation, Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida), August 2006
This action plan by the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida) presents in operational terms how work with lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender persons can be integrated into its work to better contribute to improved living conditions for LGBT persons in its partner countries.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

You can find additional resources related to sexuality and poverty in Siyanda database at:
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[1OFMANY]

Using sex only within the bounds of marraige has proven itself to be the most successful standard to the use of sex so much that it isn't even a debate any longer among those who understand freedom and happiness.

[eMachine]

Using sex only within the bounds of marraige has proven itself to be the most successful standard to the use of sex so much that it isn't even a debate any longer among those who understand freedom and happiness.

Oh but the freedom to contract a sexually transmitted disease is sooo important to some people. To such an extent that we're now vaccinating teenage girls against HPV in the US, rather than encouraging the good old "if you'd kept your pants on you wouldn't be in this position" mentality of abstinence.

I'm really kind of confused by the links, is it just an international gay rights movement or something more? I can understand how some employers might discriminate against homosexuals, causing them to be unable to find income to support themselves. So I guess I can also understand why some people would want to discourage that sort of discrimination.

I don't have anything against gays, because I think one's sexuality is their personal business. That being said, I don't really think anyone needs to be publicly affectionate regardless of their sexuality. I do suppose that's easier for me to say and do than it may be for "feelers"...

Generally though, I think that if someone is too open about personal things they should expect some controversy about it and maybe discrimination for it because of course some people are narrow-minded. I won't go around telling people about my religious beliefs (or lack of) or my political opinions because I'm aware that many people would not agree with them. Likewise, I won't nurse my baby in a public place because it's my breast and it's my business. So, why welcome controversy over something that you're mind is completely made up about, is my philosophy. Yes, I know others will disagree, because they value their right to be who they are wherever they are, but if we choose to be open about controversial issues I think we also have to expect others to exercise their rights as well.

[Mountain Lion]

is it just an international gay rights movement or something more?

If you look through the offered sources carefully you will find your answer. For instance:


Ten case studies came out of the research, which are presented in this book (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.). Some focus more on HIV/AIDS, some on reproductive health, and others on issues of gender and sexual identity. Yet common threads bind them together. First is the shared sense that the local and the global are always intertwined. Second is an understanding that sexual politics are always on some level about power, and that attempts to destabilize traditional gender and sexual relations will threaten established political, religious and familial hierarchies. But what is most visible is their common commitment to furthering an agenda of change that brings together social justice and erotic justice; to build a world where pleasure and well-being are no longer exceptional or available to only a privileged minority.

Sexuality is systematically abused and exploited by the certain political and capitalist interests in order to maintain their hold on power.

[Aurelia]

A long time ago when I worked as a barista for Starbucks, a customer came in talking about how he loved traveling to Thailand because sex with young girls is not against Thai culture. He spoke about how he liked having sex with 12 year olds. Many children who live in rural areas travel to the city as sex workers simply because there is no other alternative for them. I asked him if these young girls could afford an education or have other job opportunities whether they would still work as prostitutes and he replied, "It's not against their culture. Sex with young girls is encouraged." What do you think? Are these simply different cultural views on sex?

[blueback]

Sounds like something the "tour guide" told him. Of course, sex with 12 year old boys was normal in a small part of Western history, so maybe he's right.

"if poverty is understood to be not just material, but to also be about exclusion, ill-being, and restrictions on capacities and freedom, then the lack of sexual rights in itself constitutes poverty"

Right. Lets just expand the definitions of the words we want to use until they fit the situation we want to describe.

[Lights]

A long time ago when I worked as a barista for Starbucks, a customer came in talking about how he loved traveling to Thailand because sex with young girls is not against Thai culture. He spoke about how he liked having sex with 12 year olds. Many children who live in rural areas travel to the city as sex workers simply because there is no other alternative for them. I asked him if these young girls could afford an education or have other job opportunities whether they would still work as prostitutes and he replied, "It's not against their culture. Sex with young girls is encouraged." What do you think? Are these simply different cultural views on sex?

It may just be my cultural views, but I find that yucky. In fact, in the United States, you can be convicted of statutory rape for having sex with someone under the age of 16 overseas. I would be sorely pressed not to report someone who made such a public admission.

However, I do believe that Western culture is hysteric about sex in general. It no doubt keeps us from dealing with situations such as prostitution and sexual abuse in an intelligent and rational way.

[Aurelia]

It may just be my cultural views, but I find that yucky. In fact, in the United States, you can be convicted of statutory rape for having sex with someone under the age of 16 overseas. I would be sorely pressed not to report someone who made such a public admission.

However, I do believe that Western culture is hysteric about sex in general. It no doubt keeps us from dealing with situations such as prostitution and sexual abuse in an intelligent and rational way.

I didn't know there were any statutory rape laws for Americans overseas. Hysteric about sex in what way? I think the Western culture is over sexualized and laws aren't strict enough against sexual predators. Yesterday, the Honolulu Advertiser and Star Bulletin had an article about this man who began to sexually assault his own daughter when she was about six months old. He actually videotaped it himself having sex with her when she was just six months old then again at one years old.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

When I hear about these kinds of stories, I wish there could be some type of federal law that condemns such individuals to death as long as there is sufficient evidence to convict them. They shouldn't be held on death row for prolonged periods of time. Their death should be immediate and painful. It's not a Christian view to say some people deserve to die but that is how I honestly feel despite my religious beliefs. How do you think sex and sexual predators should be handled differently than they are now?

[Lights]

I didn't know there were any statutory rape laws for Americans overseas. Hysteric about sex in what way? I think the Western culture is over sexualized and laws aren't strict enough against sexual predators. Yesterday, the Honolulu Advertiser and Star Bulletin had an article about this man who began to sexually assault his own daughter when she was about six months old. He actually videotaped it himself having sex with her when she was just six months old then again at one years old.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

When I hear about these kinds of stories, I wish there could be some type of federal law that condemns such individuals to death as long as there is sufficient evidence to convict them. They shouldn't be held on death row for prolonged periods of time. Their death should be immediate and painful. It's not a Christian view to say some people deserve to die but that is how I honestly feel despite my religious beliefs. How do you think sex and sexual predators should be handled differently than they are now?

Well you have to keep in mind that the media usually reports the worst cases of sexual abuse. Many of the laws in the United States are simply silly. There was a case not long ago of a 17 year-old who was sentenced to prison for 15 years for having consensual oral sex with a 15 year-old girl. There was a case in Louisiana where 4 sixth graders had sex in their classroom while their teacher was out and they were effectively arrested for it. In fact, many parents of 17 year-old girls have had 18 year-old males arrested and convicted because they have had consensual sex. Possessing child pornography is punishable with 5 years in prison. Of course, all the above automatically gets a person's name on the sexual offender registry for life, which inhibits them from getting jobs and housing and from ever escaping that label. That in itself makes it impossible for them to regain a normal life despite the severity of whatever they originally did. Hence, the system promotes recidivism since there isn't much incentive for them to change.

In addition to that, you have consider that most sexual abusers were sexually abused themselves as children. It gives rise a sad cycle of abuse through the generations. Many pedophiles have also been found to have abnormal brain structure, which would indicate that some of them are suffering a biological illness not unlike Type II schizophrenia.

One of my social work professors mentioned a story of a man who at 18 had sex with a 14 year-old who had told him she was 18. He was convicted of statutory rape, served no time in prison because both the victim and parents testified on his behalf, but later he was put on the state sexual offender registry for life. Had it been the current time, he would have served a mandatory sentence of at least 10 years. When this man was in his 30's his children were beat up because he was a sexual offender. That is hysteria.

[Aurelia]

In addition to that, you have consider that most sexual abusers were sexually abused themselves as children. It gives rise a sad cycle of abuse through the generations. Many pedophiles have also been found to have abnormal brain structure, which would indicate that some of them are suffering a biological illness not unlike Type II schizophrenia.

One of my social work professors mentioned a story of a man who at 18 had sex with a 14 year-old who had told him she was 18. He was convicted of statutory rape, served no time in prison because both the victim and parents testified on his behalf, but later he was put on the state sexual offender registry for life. Had it been the current time, he would have served a mandatory sentence of at least 10 years. When this man was in his 30's his children were beat up because he was a sexual offender. That is hysteria.

Good points about statutory rape. While I am aware of the cycles of abuse that pedophiles were subjected to themselves I still think their crimes should be punishable by death. I get the feeling that perhaps you don't agree with that. According to many health professionals, their urges to sexually molest children will never go away and many pedophiles are repeat offenders.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[blueback]

What if we just made robot-doll-children for them to molest? Then whenever they had the urge they could just take the robot out of the closet and get rid of the urge.

At least, that would be the story. Actually the government would put a bomb in every doll and when all the pedophiles in the country had one they'd set the bombs off and no more problem.

[Lights]

Good points about statutory rape. While I am aware of the cycles of abuse that pedophiles were subjected to themselves I still think their crimes should be punishable by death. I get the feeling that perhaps you don't agree with that. According to many health professionals, their urges to sexually molest children will never go away and many pedophiles are repeat offenders.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

The problem is that our current system hardly treats sexual offenders. The call for punishment has been so great that there is little chance for most sexual offenders to receive adequate treatment, so I believe that our current system actually promotes recidivism. There are those whose urges will never go away, but those people can be taught and medicated so as not to act on their urges. There is also no evidence that supports the idea that the death penalty is an effective deterrent. In fact, many of the countries that don't have death penalties have some of the lowest crime and murder rates in the world. I support rehabilitation, and while I think strict penalties are necessary, I believe that treatment should be the priority, not punishment. Sexual offenders are still human beings, and they have just as much right to live as anyone else.





Lights added to this post, 0 minutes and 57 seconds later...

At least, that would be the story. Actually the government would put a bomb in every doll and when all the pedophiles in the country had one they'd set the bombs off and no more problem.

And that is just ignorant. :rolleyes:

[blueback]

You're right. We'd have to save a few pedophiles as slave labor to clean up all the little pieces of the dead pedophiles. Then, we could put them in the gladatorial arena and they could kill each other off. We could have a lottery or an essay contest to see which little kid gets to give the thumbs down!!!

[Aurelia]

The problem is that our current system hardly treats sexual offenders. The call for punishment has been so great that there is little chance for most sexual offenders to receive adequate treatment, so I believe that our current system actually promotes recidivism. There are those whose urges will never go away, but those people can be taught and medicated so as not to act on their urges. There is also no evidence that supports the idea that the death penalty is an effective deterrent. In fact, many of the countries that don't have death penalties have some of the lowest crime and murder rates in the world. I support rehabilitation, and while I think strict penalties are necessary, I believe that treatment should be the priority, not punishment. Sexual offenders are still human beings, and they have just as much right to live as anyone else.

Have you seen a follow up to the study done by Ariel Rosler, MD, and Eliezer Witztum, MD, of Israel who published a study about triptorelin and pedophiles? The article was published in New England Journal of Medicine (Feb. 12, 1998, Vol. 338, No. 7 Pages 416-422). Apparently monthly injections of the drug was linked to a decrease in sexually deviant behavior in pedophiles.

There was another article that I came across that discusses how castration may be an effective treatment for pedophiles. If you believe that death is an inappropriate method of dealing with them, do you think castration is an unusually cruel treatment?
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[Lights]

Have you seen a follow up to the study done by Ariel Rosler, MD, and Eliezer Witztum, MD, of Israel who published a study about triptorelin and pedophiles? The article was published in New England Journal of Medicine (Feb. 12, 1998, Vol. 338, No. 7 Pages 416-422). Apparently monthly injections of the drug was linked to a decrease in sexually deviant behavior in pedophiles.

That is interesting. Another sex drive killing medication.

There was another article that I came across that discusses how castration may be an effective treatment for pedophiles. If you believe that death is an inappropriate method of dealing with them, do you think castration is an unusually cruel treatment?
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

There are drugs specifically designed to eliminate sex drive. And many SSRI's have been prescribed to pedophiles to fight depression and reduce their sex drive. Chemical castration has been used in the past in severe cases and repeat offenders. It has mixed results. Pedophiles, those who are sexually attracted to children, get the best results. However, many sexual abusers don't act for sexual gratification, but rather for an adrenaline thrill or because they have a severe personality disorder and are seeking control over another. Castration isn't effective against those types because they still possess the capacity to harm others and can still gain the psychological rewards (a thrill or control) for engaging in those behaviors.

It's complicated because not all sexual offenders are the same. Would it be fair to chemically castrate a 17 year-old who was convicted of statutory rape for having consensual sex with a 15 year-old? Also, treatment should not be used as a punishment. It's purpose should be to alleviate the patient's suffering and reduce the risk of their deviant behaviors.

The problem is that people don't think about these situations rationally. They are driven by vengeance and a conception that all sexual offenders are the same. Hence we get childish responses like, "We'd have to save a few pedophiles as slave labor to clean up all the little pieces of the dead pedophiles." This kind of thinking does little to solve the cycle of abuse. In fact, it continues to perpetrate it. My favorite professor is a forensics social worker, and the stories I've heard about sexual offenders being so terrified of their communities that they decide it would be better to go back to prison, lead me to believe that such ignorance actually puts children in danger. It also stigmatizes pedophilia to the extant that most would not seek treatment before they acted on their urges. Pedophilia is an illness. It is often caused by biological and sociological factors outside of the pedophile's control, such as abnormal brain structure and sexual abuse. These people need to be treated, not turned into monsters.

When they act, they should be imprisoned, but they should also receive treatment. After they leave prison, they should have the chance that they can become a contributing member of society again. That isn't to say they shouldn't be observed for a period of time. Hence, I think the sexual offender registry should not list names for life, but rather for periods of time such as 20 years, 10 years, and 5 years, depending upon the severity of the case. I think that would be the most appropriate method of dealing with them. They then have incentive to change, and the means to do so. Of course that may seem strange to you since you want harsher punishments for sexual offenders.

[1OFMANY]

Would it be fair to chemically castrate a 17 year-old who was convicted of statutory rape for having consensual sex with a 15 year-old?

Those laws should be changed. BTW, do you know any sex offenders lights?

[Lights]

Those laws should be changed. BTW, do you know any sex offenders lights?

No.

I did have a friend who suffered from pedophilia, but she never acted on it.

[iamnotspock]

Killing all pedophiles would be an excellent solution. These people are broken and evil. But where would Catholics go to confess? ;-)

Also, I believe the age for international consent in US is 18. So sex with a 17 year old outside the country could get you a rape conviction back in the USA if you're a citizen.

That said, the federal age of consent in Japan is 13. Though local jurisdictions make it 14 - 17. Child porn there is also legal. As is various underage prostitution. Seems they are about as concerned for their children as they are for their whales. But this is a country where women still open doors for men, and must speak in falsetto on t.v. Frankly, we should have sunk the island back in WWII.

The real link between poverty and sex is that the poor are frequently subject to sexual abuse. The damage to self esteem and behavior keeps them trapped in poverty. So killing pedophiles would be economically stimulating. And I would be happy to donate money to international relief groups that added "assassination of convicted pedophiles" to their list of good deeds. But that's just me.





iamnotspock added to this post, 6 minutes and 9 seconds later...

No.

I did have a friend who suffered from pedophilia, but she never acted on it.

How do you know?

And if pedophilia is an illness, what about homocide? The urge to kill others is just another disease like the urge to molest them, right?

Well, since we don't want to discriminate against all these sick people, but we cannot cure their illness, let's just pick an empty island and let them all go live there together in peace....

[Lights]

Killing all pedophiles would be an excellent solution. These people are broken and evil. But where would Catholics go to confess? ;-)

That is so fucked up I don't know whether I should be outraged or laughing.

Also, I believe the age for international consent in US is 18. So sex with a 17 year old outside the country could get you a rape conviction back in the USA if you're a citizen.

Basically I was quoting form the PROTECT Act.

Authorizes fines and/or imprisonment for up to 30 years for U.S. citizens or residents who engage in illicit sexual conduct abroad.

For the purposes of this law, illicit sexual conduct includes commercial sex with anyone under 18, and all sex with anyone under 16.

Source: To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

That said, the federal age of consent in Japan is 13. Though local jurisdictions make it 14 - 17. Child porn there is also legal. As is various underage prostitution. Seems they are about as concerned for their children as they are for their whales.

Child pornography and child prostitution are illegal in Japan. However, if I am not mistaken, they have an animated version of child pornography and are working to create robots for the purpose that blueback suggested earlier. So they certainly aren't as moral as the United States when it comes to this issue.

The real link between poverty and sex is that the poor are frequently subject to sexual abuse. The damage to self esteem and behavior keeps them trapped in poverty. So killing pedophiles would be economically stimulating. And I would be happy to donate money to international relief groups that added "assassination of convicted pedophiles" to their list of good deeds.

That is like saying the cure for economic woes is the extermination of the mentally ill. Scary way to think. Heil iamnotspock! :laugh:





Lights added to this post, 2 minutes and 22 seconds later...

How do you know?

And if pedophilia is an illness, what about homocide? The urge to kill others is just another disease like the urge to molest them, right?

Well, since we don't want to discriminate against all these sick people, but we cannot cure their illness, let's just pick an empty island and let them all go live there together in peace....

Murder is not the same thing as pedophilia. Both situations are incredibly broad and complex.

Just because we cannot cure it doesn't mean it can't be treated through medication and counseling to the point that they can be contributing members of society.

Just so I am clear, I am not being apologetic for pedophiles who act. As I have stated before, I believe they should be imprisoned so as to protect society.

[blueback]

How long? 10 years? 20 years? Should it be a year for every indecent act? Maybe a month for every time they think about it?

You don't get to be righteous until you've actually proposed a solution. On the one hand you want them to get treatment, on the other you want them to be locked away. You sound like the morally-confused people who want to make abortions illegal but don't want to send the murdering mother to jail.

[Lights]

How long? 10 years? 20 years? Should it be a year for every indecent act? Maybe a month for every time they think about it?

You don't get to be righteous until you've actually proposed a solution. On the one hand you want them to get treatment, on the other you want them to be locked away. You sound like the morally-confused people who want to make abortions illegal but don't want to send the murdering mother to jail.

Obviously you didn't even read my posts. :rolleyes:

When they act, they should be imprisoned, but they should also receive treatment. After they leave prison, they should have the chance that they can become a contributing member of society again. That isn't to say they shouldn't be observed for a period of time. Hence, I think the sexual offender registry should not list names for life, but rather for periods of time such as 20 years, 10 years, and 5 years, depending upon the severity of the case. I think that would be the most appropriate method of dealing with them. They then have incentive to change, and the means to do so. Of course that may seem strange to you since you want harsher punishments for sexual offenders.

I made the above comments in post 15. It seems INTJs have a hard time reading more than the first few lines of a post. :laugh:

[blueback]

Okay, since you can't read all of your own posts, I've done the work for you.

Things you said that indicate they should be imprisoned:

When they act, they should be imprisoned, but they should also receive treatment.


After they leave prison, they should have the chance that they can become a contributing member of society again. That isn't to say they shouldn't be observed for a period of time. Hence, I think the sexual offender registry should not list names for life, but rather for periods of time such as 20 years, 10 years, and 5 years, depending upon the severity of the case.



Things you said that indicate they should not be imprisoned:

I support rehabilitation, and while I think strict penalties are necessary, I believe that treatment should be the priority, not punishment.


Also, treatment should not be used as a punishment. It's purpose should be to alleviate the patient's suffering and reduce the risk of their deviant behaviors.


Pedophilia is an illness. It is often caused by biological and sociological factors outside of the pedophile's control, such as abnormal brain structure and sexual abuse.


These people need to be treated, not turned into monsters.




Things you said that indicate you are righteous despite your indecision:

Sexual offenders are still human beings, and they have just as much right to live as anyone else.


the stories I've heard about sexual offenders being so terrified of their communities that they decide it would be better to go back to prison, lead me to believe that such ignorance actually puts children in danger.


I think that would be the most appropriate method of dealing with them. They then have incentive to change, and the means to do so. Of course that may seem strange to you since you want harsher punishments for sexual offenders.




Things you said that don't fit in the above categories, but are too much fun to pass up:

There are those whose urges will never go away, but those people can be taught and medicated so as not to act on their urges.


Or, they can do what is easier, which is to parrot back what the counselor wants to hear and "forget" to take their medication. There are some acts which just don't entitle someone to a second chance. Sexually abusing a child is one of them. IMHO. Even if your "fix" worked in some cases, releasing a single pedophile back into society who has every intention of doing what he loves best again is unacceptable. Do you want to be the one to tell the family's of abused children that you were "really sure" he was all better?


However, many sexual abusers don't act for sexual gratification, but rather for an adrenaline thrill or because they have a severe personality disorder and are seeking control over another.


Yeah. . .they sound like model candidates for rehabilitation. Some people are born broken, that's just the way life is. Just because they weren't broken enough to die before birth doesn't mean they add any value to society. If they cross over the line into actually detracting value from society then why should we give them more chances to do harm?


It also stigmatizes pedophilia to the extant that most would not seek treatment before they acted on their urges.


Oh, I just can't stand it when all those nice pedophiles are stigmatized. It makes me made enough to post anonymously on the internet. <-sarcasm

If only people would focus on the good they do and not on the fact that they like to sexually abuse children the world would be such a better place. Why should a person be defined by their deficient qualities? <-more sarcasm


You could have just answered my question. I asked about specifics, you choose to pretend you had already given specifics instead of actually giving some. Once again, I am impressed at your ability to delude yourself.

You mentioned time limits for the sexual offender registry, not for prison sentences. Also, you have failed to address the issue you feel is most important, treatment. How long should they get treatment? How rigorous should it be? How invasive can it be? What is the standard for judging the effectiveness of treatment? What percentage of false-positives are you ready to accept?

See? You are getting mighty touchy about the solution to a problem but you haven't actually proposed a solution yourself.

[Lights]

Does it make you feel good to try to take people words out of context. Anyone who has read my posts would know that I favor imprisonment for those who act and treatment. Stop trying to make it sound like it is an either/or thing. I made my proposition for a solution very clear but you continue to ignore it.

After they leave prison, they should have the chance that they can become a contributing member of society again. That isn't to say they shouldn't be observed for a period of time. Hence, I think the sexual offender registry should not list names for life, but rather for periods of time such as 20 years, 10 years, and 5 years, depending upon the severity of the case.

Those are specific changes to the current laws.

I'm sorry your values are different than mine and you can't see value in certain people because of your beliefs, but I see people for their strengths and potential. I believe every human being has the potential to change, and every human being deserves that opportunity. Obviously your values are different than mine, but that is no reason to attack them and call them delusions. I believe the way I do because of the experiences I have had.

[blueback]

Hey, have you ever noticed that every time we get into an argument I get more and more specific and you get less and less specific? The deeper we get the more points I address and the more I write but you write less with every post and ignore most of the points. blueback > lights

It's like you see someone who has parsed what you thought were complete ideas into smaller ideas that are still complete and you can't stand the thought of thinking any harder. Your ideas are in conflict with each other. I point that out and you just gloss over it. It's becoming an obvious pattern.

I don't mind if you don't want to think harder. What bothers me is that you want people to respect your ideas just because you took the time to express them. You did the same thing before. Maybe you think you're taking the moral high-ground, or something, by pretending that only a vague understanding of the world is necessary. I think that you're just being lazy.




I'm sorry your values are different than mine and you can't see value in certain people because of your beliefs, but I see people for their strengths and potential.


Yeah, I know you are. You always feel sorry for me when you run out of arguments. I know you see people's "strengths and potential", that is why I addressed it in my last post. That is why you are having trouble understanding the situation.

You see, everyone has potential. Who knows what someone might do in the future? I sure don't, it could be anything. They could cure cancer! They could also oversee a genocide. Potential has no value. Potential is gambling. It is a shallow way of making decisions that makes you feel good but is little better than throwing darts at a board.


I believe every human being has the potential to change, and every human being deserves that opportunity.


I know. Bad people don't suffer when good people do good things, but good people do suffer when bad people do bad things. What you want is a world in which the good people suffer the faults of the bad people. You feel better as long as everyone is getting as much slack as possible. It's a shallow way to live. If everyone gets a chance then you don't have to ever make a decision.


Obviously your values are different than mine, but that is no reason to attack them and call them delusions. I believe the way I do because of the experiences I have had.


I know, you used that same "argument" before. I'm not attacking your values, I'm attacking your conclusions. I'm curious how you reached them, but I don't really care. Your thought process is emotion and anecdote heavy; too heavy in my opinion. That is why you ran out of arguments, because you know that you don't have much evidence to back up the things you say.

[Lights]

Actually the pattern I have noticed is the more amiable I try to be for the sake of keeping the discussion from falling into these ad hominems, the more you seem to like to indulge in them. :(

I lose my motivation to discuss things with people when they begin taking my words out of context and ignoring the points I have made. This is no longer a discussion about what should be done with sexual offenders, it's pointless argument about values that you are perpetrating.

I made my point that I think those who act should be imprisoned, given treatment, watched for a period of years afterward, and then given a second chance after that. I stated many reasons I felt that was fair including...

The current system promotes recidivism because it provides no incentive for offenders to change.
Medications and counseling have proven effective in many cases.
Sexual offenders are often victims of abuse themselves and have had an illness imposed on them.
Many of the sexual offense laws, such as putting 17 year-old in jail for 15 years for having consensual oral sex with a 15 year-old, are just ludicrous.

I think those points support the case I made, whereas you haven't provided a case other than, "I think we should kill em' all". Your case is based on your personal outrage and values, and so there isn't even any point in me discussing those "specifics".