Pedophile teacher busted
- Thread starter karrie
- Start date
No, that would be your fault for knowing her problems and what the possibilities in behaviorism might be and being neglectful in ensuring that everyone in contact with her is not safe.
I haven't seen the pictures. I can't say they are pornographic. I'll leave that sort of thing to you.
Because you are wrong. You have made the claim that pictures of gagged kids is kiddie porn. The picture I posted is not kiddie porn. It proves your statement was false. That's a fact....or do you disagree that the picture isn't pornographic?
LOL...shows what you know. I have no control over her unless and until I am granted guardianship. That can't be done until the courts say she is a danger to herself or others. Thanks for the input though.
Cannuck's favorite dance...
Bugs Bunny's square dance in 'Hillbilly Hare' (best quality + subtitles!).mp4 - YouTube
Bugs Bunny's square dance in 'Hillbilly Hare' (best quality + subtitles!).mp4 - YouTube
:confused5:Why would a teacher be busted for teaching a pedophile?
I don't much like pedos, but they deserve an education, eh?:book:
:confused2:d'oh.
Mebee he'll further his education in prison, and we'll pay for it.
.....................so will he..............:naka
your cell mate, fuknuts)
I don't much like pedos, but they deserve an education, eh?:book:
:confused2:d'oh.
Mebee he'll further his education in prison, and we'll pay for it.
.....................so will he..............:naka
your cell mate, fuknuts)
The point is moot, you already agreed they were.
I realise you're the only one allowed to use a generalized position, your hypocrisy is well recorded on these boards. Predilection, intent and context seem only important to you when you need them to work in your favour. He has a reported predilection. Fed semen to minors. Accused of three counts of sexual assault on minors. And has a cache of child porn.
I understand that a special interest shill like you, with a deep belief in the Police state you think we live in, would want to be a pedo apologist and all. But you shouldn't let that interfere with how you filter reality. You just look silly, er, correction, sillier, in the long run.
So, back to your claim that you did see that caption about the pics, in the article. Are you saying now that you didn't post in reply to karrie, that you didn't see that?
You said may. I said context, predilection and intent, are only important to you, when it suits you.
So, are you ready to admit you missed the part of the article about the pics, admitted it and then edited that out?
So has mine, repeatedly.
cannuck doesn't like being honest.
...and has been stated, at this point we have no proof he wouldn't have doing this to seniors had he been working in a seniors home.
The cops didn't call it that. What do you know that they didn't.
You can keep ignoring, predilection, context and intent all you want. But the mounting evidence indicates he has a target group.
You already conceded that it was porn. Why do you insist on embarrassing yourself?
Why do you keep ignoring my questions? Is your ego so fragile you can not admit even the most minor mistake?
The part that was edited out was about child porn and your claim regarding the article. I said I missed it. After reviewing the article I realized that "child porn" were your words and not from the article there is nothing in the article about child porn. You made it up. Therefore, there was no "child porn" missed.
I don't put much value on psychiatric diagnosis because they're not scientific, are greatly influenced by trends within society, and among psychiatrists and each diagnosis isn't necessarily exact. There's a spectrum of symptoms and there's often overlapping. I actually object to the term pedophilia because it's based on alleged intent i.e., sexual attraction vs a sexual abuser, in which the intent is abuse. And it's presented as a mental illness, again, in contrast to sexual abusers who are seen as responsible for their crimes. As someone mentioned earlier, there's is a lobby effort by pedophilia advocates to have pedophilia labeled a sexual preference, and they claim innocence of any ill intent and that it's a sexual preference out of their control.
But it seems that the term pedophilia in reference to sexual attraction to children is relatively modern. According to Websters, it was first used in the mid-20th century. (1964)
Dictionary - Definition of pedophilia
I'd be fascinated to see how the term and later the diagnosis gained momentum. My guess is there were more than one sexual abusers wanting to legitimize their abuse who were behind it, with a backlash from society. My view on the term and "diagnosis" is that it's very much based on the perspective of some sexual abusers (i.e., it's not my fault, I'm sexually attracted to children; and I mean no harm to the child, I love them) rather than on the act. The term itself is rather sickening because it means child love, as if sexual abuse can have anything to do with love.) These are very common excuses among many sexual abusers.
There are men who are only sexually attracted to women being victimized by rape and murder, but we tend to call them serial sexual killers rather than rapeophiles who can't help themselves as they were born with a socially unacceptable sexual preference. And make no mistake about it, sexual abuse of children is a killer, often a slow killer because the psychological injuries alone can persist throughtout the child's life. Many commit suicide or die from associated illnesses due to the PTSD they suffer. And as someone who has survived sexual abuse as a child and have talked with quite a few others who were abused by relatives, there is no doubt in my mind that every sexual abuser is in some way mentally ill, just as every murderer or rapist or violent criminal is as well. These are not healthy people. They often also suffer from personality disorders and depression and all kinds of other mental illnesses. And that's for male and female, who we're seeing increasingly sexually abuse children almost as often as male abusers. So to say one is a pedophile who is mentally ill simply because his or her sexual attraction is exclusive to children while another isn't because he or her can't admit to being sexually attracted to children, or is also sexually attracted to adults, seems nonsensical to me. And these days when we know the devastating psychological damage that sexual abuse puts on children for the long haul to suggest that someone who is "sexually attracted to children" isn't an individual with abusive and criminal desires seems nonsensical to me too. And then there's the fact that most sexual abusers, pedophiles or not, were sexually abused themselves.
To me the difference between a pedophile and sexual abuser is that a pedophile is someone who wants to believe and have others believe that he or she can't help themselves and it's not their fault. I heard the case of a woman who apparently was dissociative when she sexually abused her children, or so she claimed, and she had no recollection of it. In the case of the parent who abused me, their denial was such that their response to being confronted with the facts was to try to kill the person who did so. There's all kinds of mentalities and denial mechanisms and tactics sexual abusers have to justify and hide their actions and responsibilities. I don't think psychiatry, society or the legal system should allow themselves to be played by those tactics.
Sorry for the long post, but this is an issue that is very important to me.
But it seems that the term pedophilia in reference to sexual attraction to children is relatively modern. According to Websters, it was first used in the mid-20th century. (1964)
Dictionary - Definition of pedophilia
I'd be fascinated to see how the term and later the diagnosis gained momentum. My guess is there were more than one sexual abusers wanting to legitimize their abuse who were behind it, with a backlash from society. My view on the term and "diagnosis" is that it's very much based on the perspective of some sexual abusers (i.e., it's not my fault, I'm sexually attracted to children; and I mean no harm to the child, I love them) rather than on the act. The term itself is rather sickening because it means child love, as if sexual abuse can have anything to do with love.) These are very common excuses among many sexual abusers.
There are men who are only sexually attracted to women being victimized by rape and murder, but we tend to call them serial sexual killers rather than rapeophiles who can't help themselves as they were born with a socially unacceptable sexual preference. And make no mistake about it, sexual abuse of children is a killer, often a slow killer because the psychological injuries alone can persist throughtout the child's life. Many commit suicide or die from associated illnesses due to the PTSD they suffer. And as someone who has survived sexual abuse as a child and have talked with quite a few others who were abused by relatives, there is no doubt in my mind that every sexual abuser is in some way mentally ill, just as every murderer or rapist or violent criminal is as well. These are not healthy people. They often also suffer from personality disorders and depression and all kinds of other mental illnesses. And that's for male and female, who we're seeing increasingly sexually abuse children almost as often as male abusers. So to say one is a pedophile who is mentally ill simply because his or her sexual attraction is exclusive to children while another isn't because he or her can't admit to being sexually attracted to children, or is also sexually attracted to adults, seems nonsensical to me. And these days when we know the devastating psychological damage that sexual abuse puts on children for the long haul to suggest that someone who is "sexually attracted to children" isn't an individual with abusive and criminal desires seems nonsensical to me too. And then there's the fact that most sexual abusers, pedophiles or not, were sexually abused themselves.
To me the difference between a pedophile and sexual abuser is that a pedophile is someone who wants to believe and have others believe that he or she can't help themselves and it's not their fault. I heard the case of a woman who apparently was dissociative when she sexually abused her children, or so she claimed, and she had no recollection of it. In the case of the parent who abused me, their denial was such that their response to being confronted with the facts was to try to kill the person who did so. There's all kinds of mentalities and denial mechanisms and tactics sexual abusers have to justify and hide their actions and responsibilities. I don't think psychiatry, society or the legal system should allow themselves to be played by those tactics.
Sorry for the long post, but this is an issue that is very important to me.
I haven't been talking about "the mounting evidence". I've been talking about the OP and the willingness of people to jump to conclusions. It's very possible that it will be determined that this guy is a pedophile. In post #36 I stated...
...so I think the odds are pretty good he probably is a pedophile. Unlike you though, I'm not willing to make stuff up about the case just to **** on the perp.