I am one of the few people able to discuss paedophiles without accusations being thrown at myself. As a survivor of a catholic children's home, and a campaigner I have challenged 'them' in a courtroom. The word paedophilia is so taboo that many use asterisks for fear their use of the word will see their laptops taken away.
First of all, it should be established that the greatest risk to children lies within their own homes, and from people who know them. That is a fact supported by all the statistics and known only too well by those who were sexually abused as children. And, as I have said before, why the fixation on sexual abuse? The physical abuse of children is far more prevalent, it is equally, if not more damaging and in the worse cases ends with the death of the child.
Stranger danger is one of those far off risks, like inadvertently falling off a cliff, that is, we really don't have to spend our daily lives worrying about it. And if it gets to the point where we daren't go out or allow our children out either, a bit of perspective is required. Those trying to fill every parents head with fear, are doing it for sinister, political motives. If someone shouts 'think of the children' everyone hangs their heads in shame and signs on the dotted line.
Every government since time began have used a scary 'bogeyman' to keep the masses in check. The enemy within, reds under the beds, vampires, monsters and the walking dead. The attack of the killer tomatoes (how could you George C. ? lol), invasion of the body snatchers. There has to be a 'hidden' threat or there would be chaos.
In the last century homosexuals were the outcasts. Homosexuality was a taboo subject, ergo, out of legally enforced ignorance, this small section of society were ostracised and even imprisoned. Homosexual men who were in positions of power lived with the constant threat of blackmail and exposure.
Now the fear, for everyone, is being accused of possessing indecent images of children. And as these 'charges' are so broad and indiscriminate and based on hysteria, everyone is at risk. Send holiday beach pictures to your family and friends and you could face charges of distributing child porn. So ridiculous are these laws that a 17 year old girl was charged with child abuse against herself for sending a picture to her boyfriend taken when she was 16. The majority of these underage images online are teenagers doing what teenagers do, yet for whatever reason the authorities are intervening and placing these kids on the Sex Offenders Register. A cynic might suspect that they are deliberately boosting the figures on that Register to make the paedophile problem appear more endemic than it actually is. The exchange of underage images is a strong argument for those who want to enforce law and order on the internet. The simple fact is, the internet has little to do with the reality of child abuse.
Unfortunately, discussion of paedophilia is always irrational, because it is such an emotive subject and any attempts at reason are shouted down because if you 'defend' paedophiles, you are clearly one yourself. Because of this, we accept without question batshit crazy rules and regulations that have sucked all the joy out of taking pictures of our kids on a beach or in the bathtub. Forget taking any snaps of your little cherub pulling funny faces in the school nativity play, only official pictures and videos (retailed by the school) will be available. The assumption being that all, or part of, the audience want the pictures for disgusting reasons. Reasons no-one would ever have thought of if they hadn't brought it up! Or, they are working on the Gradgrind basis that because of the actions of a few, many must be deprived.
I see some are currently working themselves up into a frenzy over the availability of child sex dolls. Seriously? lol. They are already talking about banning and petitions. Out of curiousity, has the availability of adult sex dolls led to rape, depravity and the abuse of women anywhere? Do people take them into work or on a train or involve them in an attack? Has a sex doll ever featured in a sex crime? How about cuddly toys with cute faces that look like baby animals, should they be destroyed forthwith just in case? Given the,'erm, let's say, odd choices of those with a penchant for inanimate objects, should vinyl be banned across the board? How about Henry Hoovers, I have seen a very peculiar story about one of those this week, should they be banned?
Those on the lookout for sexual deviancy probably see it all around them. Why they are they so concerned about what others get up to in the privacy of their own homes, baffles me. How does it affect them, or indeed their children? Violent active paedophiles, and let's differentiate between the violent active ones and the passive ones who spend their lives isolated and in cuckoo land and are of no danger to anyone. And they, make up the majority. Everyone has sexual fantasies, even 'straight' people, that's why Anne Summers and S&M outlets are so popular. Happily they do not act them out in the real world, because if they did, we might see a board room filled with executives in gimp suits. Gawd forbid.
The idea that a sex toy can trigger paedophiles to act out their fantasies is equally absurd. It's like saying the Rampant Rabbit corrupted women, OK, bad example, lol. The argument being used by the chastity belt wearers, is no different to that put forward by the clean up merchants since time began. Do they honestly believe that a book, a sculpture, a painting, a film or a whoopy cushion will lead to Sodom and Gomorrah? I feel a bit like Father Ted explaining the world outside the caravan to Father Dougal, 'Real', 'Not Real'.
I despise this 'let's get the hanging tree ready' for paedophiles ideology, because it is based on pure ignorance and the stubborn refusal of those with closed ears and closed minds to acknowledge the statistics and the reality. Why are we not seeing academics, rather than policeman, advising us on this vital issue? The pathetic, socially inept, repentant paedophiles the media place in front of the cameras are not representative of the REAL problem, and it is disingenuous to say they are.
The fact is, the strange men the MSM wheel out for the public stocks are dysfunctional misfits who don't have access to anyone. The all too real and more cunning predators meanwhile, have wormed their way into a single parent households and are 'disciplining' the kids. Others will have made a career for themselves that involves working closely with vulnerable children, usually childcare or child protection.
Like those who appear on Jeremy Kyle and every preaching documentary, the misfits they parade before us are willing to blame all their problems on the weed, their bad mother or watching the Evil Dead. They will say pretty much whatever the documentary maker wants them to say, especially if it fits the current political agenda.
Whilst I agree that violent, predatory paedophiles should not be living in a regular society, I believe the same thing of murderers and psychopaths, whatever their sexual preferences. And, back to statistics, the murderers and psychopaths far outnumber the predatory paedophiles.
Those calling for a ban on these dolls, have no understanding of human nature whatsoever. Taking away a child's favourite toy will not stop them wanting it and it definitely won't make them behave any better. Worse, it will make them become sly and it will make them resent you. There is no way of enforcing your will on another, not even on a child. You can cajole and persuade, but you cannot force. Forcing has the opposite effect. I actually hate the word ban, and I am increasingly finding myself hating those who use it. What exactly would be the purpose of banning these dolls? The only gratification I can see, is for those who want to make these unfortunate misfits suffer, and making people suffer for their sexual orientation, whatever it might be, is just plain nasty.