Dennis Ferguson

Remove this Banner Ad

Log in to remove this ad.

bunsen burner

Hall of Famer
Sep 12, 2001
32,218
1,513
Sydney
AFL Club
West Coast
Ferguson believes police drove him to suicide. The guy is persistent sex offender and the community is never safe with him in it. He gets no sympathy from me.
 

Grizzly_82

Premiership Player
Feb 9, 2010
3,845
1,121
Darwin
AFL Club
Geelong
Ferguson believes police drove him to suicide. The guy is persistent sex offender and the community is never safe with him in it. He gets no sympathy from me.
Was shocked that he applied to do volunteer work with children... Must be living on a different planet thinking that would get approve.

Don't think there would be much sympathy for the creature departure.
 

bunsen burner

Hall of Famer
Sep 12, 2001
32,218
1,513
Sydney
AFL Club
West Coast
Was shocked that he applied to do volunteer work with children... Must be living on a different planet thinking that would get approve.

Don't think there would be much sympathy for the creature departure.
The problem with many pedophiles is that they have a sexual leaning towards kids (not sure how it works as certainly there is evidence that it's not so much sexual but about fear and abuse and this is why many pedophiles are former victims and repeat the cycle).

But these pedophiles believe that they were born with a sexual attraction to kids so it's not their fault and that they should be able to satisfy their desires like the rest of us (who have sexual relations with other assenting adults). They therefore believe they are hard done by and because they are doing what is natural to them, then it is either ok, or not their fault.

I suspect some of the ones who have been abused think "I was abused and I am ok so it's ok for me to abuse others"

I also think because of all the above reasons, often judges look on them with sympathy (sometimes empathy). They see these people are just doing what nature dealt them and ration that this isn't as bad as someone who burgles a house.
 

Grizzly_82

Premiership Player
Feb 9, 2010
3,845
1,121
Darwin
AFL Club
Geelong
The problem with many pedophiles is that they have a sexual leaning towards kids (not sure how it works as certainly there is evidence that it's not so much sexual but about fear and abuse and this is why many pedophiles are former victims and repeat the cycle).

But these pedophiles believe that they were born with a sexual attraction to kids so it's not their fault and that they should be able to satisfy their desires like the rest of us (who have sexual relations with other assenting adults). They therefore believe they are hard done by and because they are doing what is natural to them, then it is either ok, or not their fault.

I suspect some of the ones who have been abused think "I was abused and I am ok so it's ok for me to abuse others"

I also think because of all the above reasons, often judges look on them with sympathy (sometimes empathy). They see these people are just doing what nature dealt them and ration that this isn't as bad as someone who burgles a house.
Not all children that were abused continue the cycle, myself and many other haven't and never will do that.

I find its always a cop out to use childhood trauma to say you couldn't help yourself, every abuse victim knows how they felt and how the abuse is wrong. Staggers me to hear from convicted pedophilies that they blame their past when they clearly had a choice in knowing what is appropriate and what is not.

On another note its why many abuse victims never talk or admit abuse as the stigma is that they will continue the cycle due to theses scumbags claiming they couldn't help themselves .
 

bunsen burner

Hall of Famer
Sep 12, 2001
32,218
1,513
Sydney
AFL Club
West Coast
Not all children that were abused continue the cycle, myself and many other haven't and never will do that.
I know. But for some reason many pedos were abused as children and then gone onto to replicate the process on others.

This sort of suggests for these pedos that it's not about being born with it like others are born attracted to women or me, but are repeating a cycle of abuse.

I think there needs to be studies done on what makes pedos tick, are some born with an attraction to kids? Are some repeating a cycle? Do some have both traits? And what is the split between the two groups etc?

Unfortunately for the ones who are naturally sexually attracted to kids, it's very hard to stop them. As humans we are sexual beings and will endeavour to satisfy our urges. The more studies we do the more chance we have of stopping them. Chemical castration gets banded about a lot but experts say a problem is that for the cycle repeaters it's more about abusing and hurting kids than a sexual desire so any form of chemical castration will not work with these types.


I find its always a cop out to use childhood trauma to say you couldn't help yourself, every abuse victim knows how they felt and how the abuse is wrong. Staggers me to hear from convicted pedophilies that they blame their past when they clearly had a choice in knowing what is appropriate and what is not.

On another note its why many abuse victims never talk or admit abuse as the stigma is that they will continue the cycle due to theses scumbags claiming they couldn't help themselves .
Generally court and prison sentencing is pretty good in Australia but the one thing I constantly notice is pedos seem to always get lenient sentences.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

bunsen burner

Hall of Famer
Sep 12, 2001
32,218
1,513
Sydney
AFL Club
West Coast
That's probably because judges know what happens to peds in jail.
Pretty sure it is how I see it. It's sympathy because judges often don't think they are really responsible.

The truth is that when pedos go to jail they get offered to go into protection wings and most of them take it. They are typically safe on these wings. It's only when they go into normal population and get found out are they assaulted.
 

Grizzly_82

Premiership Player
Feb 9, 2010
3,845
1,121
Darwin
AFL Club
Geelong
Pretty sure it is how I see it. It's sympathy because judges often don't think they are really responsible.

The truth is that when pedos go to jail they get offered to go into protection wings and most of them take it. They are typically safe on these wings. It's only when they go into normal population and get found out are they assaulted.]
If the judges truly think that then the justice system is beyond broken , pretty shocking line of thinking believing that the pedos had no way to correct their behaviour or choices .
 

bunsen burner

Hall of Famer
Sep 12, 2001
32,218
1,513
Sydney
AFL Club
West Coast
If the judges truly think that then the justice system is beyond broken , pretty shocking line of thinking believing that the pedos had no way to correct their behaviour or choices .
I can't explain any other reason why pedos get light sentences. It's not near as bad as it used to be but the punishments are still not matching the crimes.

I don't think it's a case of them thinking pedos can't correct their behavior (ie abstain from the sexual desires), but more a case of "it's not his fault he has these desires, therefore I will show him some leniency" and "he's not a common uneducated scumbag criminal doing petty crime his whole life, in every other way he's a normal person but has unfortunately has a thing for kiddies".
 

Donners

Cancelled
Sep 1, 2002
4,681
1,828
AFL Club
Sydney
It's sympathy because judges often don't think they are really responsible.
Not really.

Firstly, there are very few true paedophiles. A person who commits sexual offences against minors is not necessarily a paedophile, in the same way that an arsonist is not necessarily a pyromaniac or a thief is not necessarily a kleptomaniac.

Of those who do fit the category, there often are substantial sentences imposed, with the added potential for the supervision order system, which provides for their ongoing detention and/or monitoring with the aim of treating them in order to reduce their risk. This is a quite remarkable step which is not available for other types of offender, many of whom are much more likely to reoffend.

There are several factors for ostensibly low sentencing, such as:

- Due to the low conviction rate at trial, a substantial number of sentences for such offences (around 50%) are from pleas of guilty. That's an immediate sentence reduction of roughly 25-35%, plus probably on fewer/less serious charges.

- The vast majority of child sex offenders (around 95%) have no relevant priors, and often no priors at all.

- Of those who do reoffend, almost all have low intellect and substantial issues with mental health which impairs their judgment, along with limited support in the community. Many have a history of being abused themselves, which can impair their sexual development and ability to form/understanding of relationships. So in that sense, yes, their responsibility is reduced.

- Sex offences were historically shabbily treated in the law, with poor legislation and low sentences. Sentencing trends are very difficult to change, and the pattern has persisted despite prosecution attempts to challenge them.
 

bunsen burner

Hall of Famer
Sep 12, 2001
32,218
1,513
Sydney
AFL Club
West Coast
Not really.

Firstly, there are very few true paedophiles. A person who commits sexual offences against minors is not necessarily a paedophile, in the same way that an arsonist is not necessarily a pyromaniac or a thief is not necessarily a kleptomaniac.
Rubbish.

Whilst an arsonist may not be a pyromaniac, and arsonist is in fact.....an arsonist!

And a pedophile is in fact.......a pedophile!
 

Donners

Cancelled
Sep 1, 2002
4,681
1,828
AFL Club
Sydney
Rubbish.

Whilst an arsonist may not be a pyromaniac, and arsonist is in fact.....an arsonist!

And a pedophile is in fact.......a pedophile!
Nope. Paedophilia is to child sex offences as pyromania is to arson.

Pyromania is a disorder. Arson is an offence.

Paedophilia is a psychiatric disorder.
 

bunsen burner

Hall of Famer
Sep 12, 2001
32,218
1,513
Sydney
AFL Club
West Coast
Paedophilia is a psychiatric disorder.
I see, so the definition of pedophilia you adhere to (because there are many) is the correct one?

http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophile

A pedophile is a person 16 years of age or older who is primarily or exclusively sexually attracted to children who have not begun puberty (girls 10 years old or less, and boys 11 year old or less, on average).[1][2][3][4][5] The prepubescent child must be at least five years younger than the person in the case of adolescent pedophiles before the attraction can be diagnosed as pedophilia.[1]

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/pedophilia?s=t

pe·do·phil·i·a

[pee-duh-fil-ee-uh] Show IPA

noun, Psychiatry.
sexual desire in an adult for a child.

There's two definitions that don't mention anything about a mental condition and suggest that pedophilia is simply attraction to children. I'm not sure as to why you're so arrogant in thinking your view of what a pedophile is is the one and only definition?
And in the context of the thread, pedo = any person that is attracted to children
 

bunsen burner

Hall of Famer
Sep 12, 2001
32,218
1,513
Sydney
AFL Club
West Coast
Nope. Paedophilia is to child sex offences as pyromania is to arson.

Pyromania is a disorder. Arson is an offence.

Paedophilia is a psychiatric disorder.
So you're saying an adult who touches up 11 year old boys is a sex offender but not necessarily a pedophile?

Turn it up. A pedo is someone who is attracted to children or someone who fiddles with kids. It's not the sort of thing that people experiment with - people do it because they're into it.

A person who steals something is not necessary a thief, and a person who smokes a cigarette is not necessarily a smoker - but it's not as if a child sex offender can say:

"I only touch up kids when I'm drinking so I'm not a pedo"

If you touch up kids you're a dirty noncy pedo.
 

Donners

Cancelled
Sep 1, 2002
4,681
1,828
AFL Club
Sydney
I see, so the definition of pedophilia you adhere to (because there are many) is the correct one?

http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophile

A pedophile is a person 16 years of age or older who is primarily or exclusively sexually attracted to children who have not begun puberty (girls 10 years old or less, and boys 11 year old or less, on average).[1][2][3][4][5] The prepubescent child must be at least five years younger than the person in the case of adolescent pedophiles before the attraction can be diagnosed as pedophilia.[1]

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/pedophilia?s=t

pe·do·phil·i·a

[pee-duh-fil-ee-uh] Show IPA
noun, Psychiatry.
sexual desire in an adult for a child.
There's two definitions that don't mention anything about a mental condition and suggest that pedophilia is simply attraction to children. I'm not sure as to why you're so arrogant in thinking your view of what a pedophile is is the one and only definition?
And in the context of the thread, pedo = any person that is attracted to children
I'm using it in the sense in which it is used in sentencing, which is the context of the discussion.
 

Hard_to_Beat

Brownlow Medallist
Suspended
Aug 9, 2012
11,162
6,117
AFL Club
North Melbourne
It has been recognised as a psychiatric illness for decades:

Diagnostic Criteria for Pedophilia in DSM-III-R (1987)

A. Over a period of at least 6 months, recurrent intense sexual urges and sexually arousing fantasies involving sexual activity with a prepubescent child or children (generally age 13 or younger).
B. The person has acted on these urges, or is markedly distressed by them.
C. The person is at least 16 years old and at least 5 years older than the child or children in A.

Diagnostic Criteria for Pedophilia in DSM-IV (1994)

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 fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors cause clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning.
C. The person is at least age 16 years and at least 5 years older than the child or children in Criterion A.

Diagnostic Criteria for Pedophilia in DSM-IV-TR (2000)

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 sexual 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.
 

bunsen burner

Hall of Famer
Sep 12, 2001
32,218
1,513
Sydney
AFL Club
West Coast
I'm using it in the sense in which it is used in sentencing, which is the context of the discussion.
It's sort of irrelevant.

If a guy touches up his nephew 10 times over a 12 month period it doesn't matter if he fits the court's definition of a sex offender or "sex offender and pedophile".

The facts are is he touched up his nephew 10 times in the last year.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad