I'm just saying that you can't trust someone that already admits to being very sick. Sooner or later most indulge themselves. I was reading some of these comments saying that they believe that their friend hasn't done anything yet simply cause they trust their friend. That isn't how it works. If people believed my step dad over me I would have had to suffer his wrath at telling someone. What if this 'friend' DID touch a child and that child is too afraid to speak out or too young to understand that it wasn't appropriate? What if it is the guilty feeling spurring the person to tell you? I'm mostly going against the ones saying that they just accept that this person hasn't and won't do anything wrong, just because. I do see that others are requesting medical help for the friend.

Are you sure that "most indulge themselves"? Being attracted to children isn't something people readily admit to (for the myriad reasons that have already been highlighted in this thread), so I'd be curious to know how you came to that conclusion. If someone does finally admit to being this way, would you then assume that they have done something wrong?

I said what if not that I knew they already did something. This whole ordeal is not worth the waiting to see game. This is shoot first ask questions after. (in a sense that shoot means deal with it not actually shooting them)

Okay so we don't know the statistics of those with the sickness that HAVEN'T touched a child (or been caught) but that just makes it all the more scary. The ones that have been caught almost always have proof that it had been festering under the surface the whole time.

I agree, which is all the more reason to encourage them to admit they have a problem and seek the appropriate help. If we continue as a society to demonize the people dealing with this kind of sickness (even just having the thoughts themselves), that only leads them to keep in it and cause it to fester under the surface.

Exactly. This is the counter-productiveness I was referring to in the other thread.

(October 26, 2016 at 6:08 am)paulpablo Wrote:

(October 26, 2016 at 2:17 am)robvalue Wrote: Let's pretend you have a friend, and you're a parent. You've known this friend a long time. You trust them, and you believe they are a good person.

One day they confide in you that they are a paedophile. They have sexual urges towards young children. They say they haven't ever acted on them, nor do they intend to, and you believe they are sincere. They just want your understanding and support, and they ask that you keep this confidential.

I haven't answered the main part of the question yet, but this is just about the problem I have with this section that leads up to the question.

I don't see why I believe they are sincere? [...]

The way I see it is, even if I do strongly believe they are sincere, belief is never enough and I can never know for sure.

I'd just want them to get treatment. I don't think I could bring myself to really stay in contact with them because I'd feel too uncomfortable.

And I wouldn't tell anyone because they technically, as far as I would know, wouldn't have acted on any of it or broken the law so there would be nothing to report. If the person is innocent and it's just urges it's treatment that would help. And if the person isn't innocent it's evidence that would help. If I'm not able to provide either treatment for a non-criminal pedophile or evidence against a criminal pedophile then all I'm left with is someone I personally feel too uncomfortable to stay in contact with.

(October 26, 2016 at 3:54 pm)mlmooney89 Wrote: I'm just saying that you can't trust someone that already admits to being very sick. Sooner or later most indulge themselves. I was reading some of these comments saying that they believe that their friend hasn't done anything yet simply cause they trust their friend. That isn't how it works. If people believed my step dad over me I would have had to suffer his wrath at telling someone. What if this 'friend' DID touch a child and that child is too afraid to speak out or too young to understand that it wasn't appropriate? What if it is the guilty feeling spurring the person to tell you? I'm mostly going against the ones saying that they just accept that this person hasn't and won't do anything wrong, just because. I do see that others are requesting medical help for the friend.

Well it's established that this is my friend. So I should know them enough to know whether or not they're yanking my chain when they said they never touched a child inappropriately. Of course if it was a friend, and I spent a lot of time with them, including with children, I'd probably already have some idea that they liked kids a little too much.

The important thing is the present and future. Which is why I'd maintain contact with them, and make sure they got treatment and whatever else they need. I don't make friends, or throw them away, easily. Now if something comes out that proves s/he did do something wrong, that's for the cops and judicial system to work out.

(October 26, 2016 at 4:28 pm)Chad32 Wrote:

(October 26, 2016 at 3:54 pm)mlmooney89 Wrote: I'm just saying that you can't trust someone that already admits to being very sick. Sooner or later most indulge themselves. I was reading some of these comments saying that they believe that their friend hasn't done anything yet simply cause they trust their friend. That isn't how it works. If people believed my step dad over me I would have had to suffer his wrath at telling someone. What if this 'friend' DID touch a child and that child is too afraid to speak out or too young to understand that it wasn't appropriate? What if it is the guilty feeling spurring the person to tell you? I'm mostly going against the ones saying that they just accept that this person hasn't and won't do anything wrong, just because. I do see that others are requesting medical help for the friend.

Well it's established that this is my friend. So I should know them enough to know whether or not they're yanking my chain when they said they never touched a child inappropriately. Of course if it was a friend, and I spent a lot of time with them, including with children, I'd probably already have some idea that they liked kids a little too much.

The important thing is the present and future. Which is why I'd maintain contact with them, and make sure they got treatment and whatever else they need. I don't make friends, or throw them away, easily. Now if something comes out that proves s/he did do something wrong, that's for the cops and judicial system to work out.

See there it is you believe them because you trust them and THINK you know them. Are you telling me that my mom didn't know the man she was married to for over 15 years? Didn't see how he treated me exactly like he did my sisters? How being married to him she trusted him with her life, her children's lives, and loved him? How she had known him for over 20 years, slept next to him every night, talked about everything under the sun with him, saw that he was a substitute teacher and how all the kids loved him. How everyone, including my mother, was blindsided, stunned, unable to accept it for truth that this mason/Shriner, volunteer at charities, Christian, wonderful father/teacher/husband, charismatic man had been sexually abusing his oldest daughter for years.

You can think you know your friend all you want but that doesn't mean you do.

We're pretending I have a friend?

Cool!

I changed my mind. If the pedophile is functional enough to fly under the radar they can control their urges. How is one, supposedly, so compelled to fuck little kids that they could potentially do it in secret, thereby destroying a future person's life forever, and the offender knowing this perfectly well, as well as inviting possible jail time and ostracization from society if they are found out, and still function as a normal person? They can't be.