What has the LGBT community got against lesbians?

[Guest]

First topic message reminder :

Everywhere you look, there are reminders of how little the safety and wellbeing of lesbian women is valued. We can’t seem to escape violence and vilification. Especially since, in recent months, a lot of it has come from within the LGBT communities we helped build.

This year, an endless string of physical attacks has been reported in the news. In London, for example, a group of young men assaulted a lesbian couple on a bus after the two women refused to kiss for their entertainment. The teenagers responsible were charged last week. Then, Ellie-Mae Mulholland, an 18-year-old lesbian from Walsall Garth, was beaten black and blue by assailants who told her “you and your girlfriend are going to get it 10 times worse next time”. In Chile’s Fifth region, multiple butch lesbians have been assaulted and murdered.

Lesbians need as much support now as we ever did. But even within LGBT spheres, where we are – at least theoretically – part of the community, lesbians are now being vilified. For decades, gay and lesbian rights advocates fought for our sexualities to be accepted as legitimate.

But on Twitter the word lesbian has become a suspicious ‘TERF dogwhistle’. TERF is a nasty term. It stands for trans-exclusionary radical feminist and is used, in particular, to describe lesbian feminists, because we aren’t always willing to toe the latest ideological line when it comes to gender. It has also become synonymous with being subhuman.


https://unherd.com/2019/07/why-has-the-lgbt-community-turned-against-lesbians/?=sideshare

[Syl]

Tommy said this..."Actually... statistics show that around a third of convicted paedophiles are men who target only boys...!"

Quill answered....."Which they learned in prison. They are not gay."

Tommy then said.....
"No... they are paedophiles who targeted boys only... for which they ended up being caught for... then prosecuted for... then convicted for..."

He didn't say all paedophiles who targer boys are gay.
He is right that statistics show that paedophiles are twice as likely to target girls than boys.
Nowhere was it suggested that all paedophiles who target boys are homosexual, obviously they are not.
Just as all rapists who target men are not homosexual....it can be a power thing rather than a sexual preference.

[Tommy Monk]

Tommy didn't say they were. He was counteracting your claim that men who abuse boys only do so after they've been sent to prison.

That is not what tommy said and many of those convicted that abuse boys, are in hetrosexual relationships

Have you got any evidence to back up your claim that many male paedophiles who target only boys, are in fact in heterosexual relationships...!?

[Eilzel]

Tommy said this..."Actually... statistics show that around a third of convicted paedophiles are men who target only boys...!"

Quill answered....."Which they learned in prison. They are not gay."

Tommy then said.....
"No... they are paedophiles who targeted boys only... for which they ended up being caught for... then prosecuted for... then convicted for..."

He didn't say  all paedophiles who targer boys are gay.  
He is right that statistics show that paedophiles are twice as likely to target girls than boys.
Nowhere was it suggested that all paedophiles who target boys are homosexual, obviously they are not.
Just as all rapists who target men are not homosexual....it can be a power thing rather than a sexual preference.

That was the implication though.

And I'm pretty sure he has said as much in the past.

Tommy, can you clarify?

[Raggamuffin]

The point is that Quill claimed that men who abuse boys only learned to do so in prison. That is what I would dispute.

[Guest]

Tommy said this..."Actually... statistics show that around a third of convicted paedophiles are men who target only boys...!"

Quill answered....."Which they learned in prison. They are not gay."

Tommy then said.....
"No... they are paedophiles who targeted boys only... for which they ended up being caught for... then prosecuted for... then convicted for..."

He didn't say  all paedophiles who targer boys are gay.  
He is right that statistics show that paedophiles are twice as likely to target girls than boys.
Nowhere was it suggested that all paedophiles who target boys are homosexual, obviously they are not.
Just as all rapists who target men are not homosexual....it can be a power thing rather than a sexual preference.

That was the implication though.

And I'm pretty sure he has said as much in the past.

Tommy, can you clarify?

We both know what Tommy is saying as he has made the very same claims in the past
Some people are simple to dumb or naive to see that

[Guest]

Now Tommy in the past has often made refernece to the percentage of homosexuals in the uk. Then stating that the percentage of the number of boy victims of child sex abuse is a third. Why would he make such a comparrison in percentages and numbers? 

As its his belief all these paedophiles are gay that have sexually abused boys. Neglecting the fact many absuers live and are married in hetrosexual relationships and many target both boys and girls. Most are not attracted to or have a sexual interest in adult men.

So some people need to stop being naive or dumb here. As some of us have been down this road many times with Tommy and know exactly what he is claiming

[Guest]

That is not what tommy said and many of those convicted that abuse boys, are in hetrosexual relationships

Have you got any evidence to back up your claim that many male paedophiles who target only boys, are in fact in heterosexual relationships...!?

And if people need further evidence of what I have been saying is true. You need only look at the above statement by Tommy

As to evidence?

No problem

According to the American Psychological Association, children are not more likely to be molested by LGBT parents or their LGBT friends or acquaintances. Gregory Herek, a professor at the University of California, Davis, who is one of the nation's leading researchers on prejudice against sexual minorities, reviewed a series of studies and found no evidence that gay men molest children at higher rates than heterosexual men.

Anti-gay activists who make that claim allege that all men who molest male children should be seen as homosexual. But research by A. Nicholas Groth, a pioneer in the field of sexual abuse of children, shows that is not so. Groth found that there are two types of child molesters: fixated and regressive. The fixated child molester — the stereotypical pedophile — cannot be considered homosexual or heterosexual because "he often finds adults of either sex repulsive" and often molests children of both sexes. Regressive child molesters are generally attracted to other adults, but may "regress" to focusing on children when confronted with stressful situations. Groth found, as Herek notes, that the majority of regressed offenders were heterosexual in their adult relationships.

The Child Molestation Research & Prevention Institute notes that 90% of child molesters target children in their network of family and friends, and the majority are men married to women. Most child molesters, therefore, are not gay people lingering outside schools waiting to snatch children from the playground, as much religious-right rhetoric suggests.

https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/intelligence-report/2011/10-anti-gay-myths-debunked

[Syl]

Tommy said this..."Actually... statistics show that around a third of convicted paedophiles are men who target only boys...!"

Quill answered....."Which they learned in prison. They are not gay."

Tommy then said.....
"No... they are paedophiles who targeted boys only... for which they ended up being caught for... then prosecuted for... then convicted for..."

He didn't say  all paedophiles who targer boys are gay.  
He is right that statistics show that paedophiles are twice as likely to target girls than boys.
Nowhere was it suggested that all paedophiles who target boys are homosexual, obviously they are not.
Just as all rapists who target men are not homosexual....it can be a power thing rather than a sexual preference.

That was the implication though.

And I'm pretty sure he has said as much in the past.

Tommy, can you clarify?

That may have been the implication I dont know, but it's the way Quill and Didge then proceed with the thread concentrating on something that hasn't actually been said that makes it wrong.
Quill possibly doesn't always read correctly what has been written,....Didge will seize any opportunity to claim he is right, even if it's based on something that hasn't been said in the first place. .

[Syl]

The point is that Quill claimed that men who abuse boys only learned to do so in prison. That is what I would dispute.

I should think they learn a whole lot of unsociable and illegal stuff in jails, I very much doubt whether being imprisoned turns anyone into a paedophile.

[Guest]

"there are none so blind as those who will not see"

[Tommy Monk]

Have you got any evidence to back up your claim that many male paedophiles who target only boys, are in fact in heterosexual relationships...!?

And if people need further evidence of what I have been saying is true. You need only look at the above statement by Tommy

As to evidence?

No problem

According to the American Psychological Association, children are not more likely to be molested by LGBT parents or their LGBT friends or acquaintances. Gregory Herek, a professor at the University of California, Davis, who is one of the nation's leading researchers on prejudice against sexual minorities, reviewed a series of studies and found no evidence that gay men molest children at higher rates than heterosexual men.

Anti-gay activists who make that claim allege that all men who molest male children should be seen as homosexual. But research by A. Nicholas Groth, a pioneer in the field of sexual abuse of children, shows that is not so. Groth found that there are two types of child molesters: fixated and regressive. The fixated child molester — the stereotypical pedophile — cannot be considered homosexual or heterosexual because "he often finds adults of either sex repulsive" and often molests children of both sexes. Regressive child molesters are generally attracted to other adults, but may "regress" to focusing on children when confronted with stressful situations. Groth found, as Herek notes, that the majority of regressed offenders were heterosexual in their adult relationships.

The Child Molestation Research & Prevention Institute notes that 90% of child molesters target children in their network of family and friends, and the majority are men married to women. Most child molesters, therefore, are not gay people lingering outside schools waiting to snatch children from the playground, as much religious-right rhetoric suggests.

https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/intelligence-report/2011/10-anti-gay-myths-debunked

That doesn't show that many men who target only boys are in heterosexual relationships...


What it claims is that homosexuals are just as likely to sexually assault children as heterosexual men...


It doesn't say that homosexuals don't target only boys!


Maybe it would help if you actually read and understood some of the stuff you post up in argument...?

Then you wouldn't keep making yourself look so silly!

[Tommy Monk]

The point is that Quill claimed that men who abuse boys only learned to do so in prison. That is what I would dispute.

I should think they learn a whole lot of unsociable and illegal stuff in jails, I very much doubt whether being imprisoned turns anyone into a paedophile.

Exactly!


And this whole bit of debate only came up after quill claimed that heterosexuals were more likely to be involved in predatory sexual behaviour...


And quite frankly... it is a complete diversion from my earlier points on the thread...

[Guest]

And if people need further evidence of what I have been saying is true. You need only look at the above statement by Tommy

As to evidence?

No problem

That doesn't show that many men who target only boys are in heterosexual relationships...

What it says is that homosexuals are just as likely to sexually assault children as heterosexual men...

It doesn't say that homosexuals don't target only boys!

1) Yes it does and even provides links to data on this

2) Nowhere does it claim homosexuals are just as likely to assualt children as hetrosexual men, your words, not the articles

3) What does your last point have anything to with your previous question me. Asking whether many child sex abusers are in hetroisexual relationships. The source and data proves this to be the case.

I wonder if some other posters are still going to deny Tommys stance here

[Tommy Monk]

Try reading the first paragraph... it clearly claims that gay men don't abuse children at higher rates than heterosexuals... but it doesn't claim heterosexuals abuse children at higher rates either... the claim is that the rates are about the same...


It then tries to use the opinion of one person to try to say that men who target only boys shouldn't be considered as homosexual at all...


And the third paragraph only says that most of 90% of abusers are in heterosexual relationships... not saying anyhing about how many of the men who target only boys are in heterosexual relationships at all...!!!


So... just a load of waffle really, that doesn't answer the question...!!!


If you had actually understood what your copy and paste actually said... you wouldn't be claiming it says stuff that it doesn't!!!

[Guest]

Try reading the first paragraph... it clearly claims that gay men don't abuse children at higher rates than heterosexuals... but it doesn't claim heterosexuals abuse children at higher rates either... the claim is that the rates are about the same...

It then tries to use the opinion of one person to try to say that men who target only boys shouldn't be considered as homosexual at all...

And the third paragraph only says that most of 90% of abusers are in heterosexual relationships... not saying anyhing about how many of the men who target only boys are in heterosexual relationships at all...!!!


So... just a load of waffle really, that doesn't answer the question...!!!


If you had actually understood what your copy and paste actually said... you wouldn't be claiming it says stuff that it doesn't!!!

1) Again your interpretation of what the article, not what the actuall article does say

2) Its not an opinion but based on facts that come from the organisation child molestation prevention.

http://www.childmolestationprevention.org/pages/tell_others_the_facts.html

3) Well being as that is 90%, and the majority of that 90% were married, correct? Some also would be women. Or did you not think of that?

4) No, this proves that you are nothing more than a very hatefukl homophobic loser. Who when presented with facts, tries to deny them

Now I have presented evidence to not only prove Tommys stance here had an ulterior motive. Being as we have seen this same stance he has countless times before, but also proves his stance is inherantly incorrect

Now I shall leave him to sulk, as I have nothing further to say to him on this thread. Where his quest is to promnote hate against gay people

[Tommy Monk]

I see you are still having trouble differentiating what the article actually says...

The first paragraph claims homosexual men don't abuse children more than heterosexual men... it doesn't say it is less either...

The 2nd paragraph is based on the research by some bloke called A. Groth... it tries to claim that men who target boys shouldnt be considered as homosexual... and all it goes on to say is...

"...the majority of regressed offenders were heterosexual in their adult relationships...'


Which you would sort of expect anyway by the fact that only a very small percentage of the population are homosexual (less than 1%)...


The 3rd paragraph talks about the organisation called 'child molestation prevention'... and it only says that MOST of 90% of abusers are in heterosexual relationships... not saying anyhing about how many of the men who target only boys are in heterosexual relationships and not saying exactly what % of men who target only boys are homosexual at all...!!!



You see... all that confirms is that quite a sizeable % of child abusers are homosexual men who target only boys!!!


I cant remember ever reading anything about any homosexual child abuser who targeted only girls... I wonder why...!?

[Guest]

And if people need further evidence of what I have been saying is true. You need only look at the above statement by Tommy

As to evidence?

No problem

According to the American Psychological Association, children are not more likely to be molested by LGBT parents or their LGBT friends or acquaintances. Gregory Herek, a professor at the University of California, Davis, who is one of the nation's leading researchers on prejudice against sexual minorities, reviewed a series of studies and found no evidence that gay men molest children at higher rates than heterosexual men.

Anti-gay activists who make that claim allege that all men who molest male children should be seen as homosexual. But research by A. Nicholas Groth, a pioneer in the field of sexual abuse of children, shows that is not so. Groth found that there are two types of child molesters: fixated and regressive. The fixated child molester — the stereotypical pedophile — cannot be considered homosexual or heterosexual because "he often finds adults of either sex repulsive" and often molests children of both sexes. Regressive child molesters are generally attracted to other adults, but may "regress" to focusing on children when confronted with stressful situations. Groth found, as Herek notes, that the majority of regressed offenders were heterosexual in their adult relationships.

The Child Molestation Research & Prevention Institute notes that 90% of child molesters target children in their network of family and friends, and the majority are men married to women. Most child molesters, therefore, are not gay people lingering outside schools waiting to snatch children from the playground, as much religious-right rhetoric suggests.

https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/intelligence-report/2011/10-anti-gay-myths-debunked

A 2017 Gallup poll concluded that 4.5% of adult Americans identified as LGBT with 5.1% of women identifying as LGBT, compared with 3.9% of men. 


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_demographics_of_the_United_States

[Tommy Monk]

A poll... ok... we know how accurate they always are...

[Original Quill]

That may have been the implication I dont know, but it's the way Quill and Didge then proceed with the thread concentrating on something that hasn't actually been said that makes it wrong.

Honestly Syl, use some logic.  Who care’s what’s been said by tommy and his cronies.  Heed the experts:

Homosexuality and Pedophila: The False Link

Joe Kort, Ph.D., Certified Sex and Relationship Therapist

Updated Feb 02, 2016

It is so hard to believe that people are still trying to use the purported link between pedophilia and homosexuality. The old, tired argument that pedophilia is linked with homosexuality is wrong on many levels.

First, we need to clarify our definitions. When discussing sexual abuse and molestation of children, there’s often conflict over terminology. One frequently quoted researcher on the topic of homosexuality and child molestation, Gregory Herek, a research psychologist at the University of California, defines pedophilia as “a psychosexual disorder characterized by a preference for prepubescent children as sexual partners, which may or may not be acted upon.” He defines child sexual abuse as “actual sexual contact between an adult and someone who has not reached the legal age of consent.” Not all pedophiles actually molest children, he points out. A pedophile may be attracted to children but never actually engage in sexual contact with them. Quite often, pedophiles never develop a sexual orientation toward other adults.

Herek points out that child molestation and child sexual abuse refer to “actions,” without implying any “particular psychological makeup or motive on the part of the perpetrator.” In other words, not all incidents of child sexual abuse are perpetrated by pedophiles. Pedophilia can be viewed as a kind of sexual fetish, wherein the person requires the mental image of a child — not necessarily a flesh-and-blood child — to achieve sexual gratification.

Rarely does a pedophile experience sexual desire for adults of either gender. They usually don’t identify as homosexual; the majority identify as heterosexual, even those who abuse children of the same gender. They are sexually aroused by extreme youth, not by gender.

In contrast, child molesters often exert power and control over children in an effort to dominate them. They do experience sexual desire for adults but molest children episodically, for reasons apart from sexual desire, much as rapists enjoy power, violence, and controlling their humiliated victims. Indeed, research strongly suggests that a child molester isn’t any more likely to be homosexual than heterosexual.

In fact, some research shows that for pedophiles, the gender of the child is immaterial. Accessibility is more the factor in whom a pedophile abuses. This may explain the high incidence of children molested in church communities and fraternal organizations, where the pedophile may more easily have access to children.

In these situations, an adult male is trusted by those around him, including children and their families. Males are often given access to boys to mentor, teach, coach, and advise. Therefore, a male pedophile may have easier access to a male child. In trying to make sense of an adult male’s sexually abusing a male child, many of us mislabel it as an act of homosexuality, which it isn’t.

Feminists have argued for years that rape is not a sex act but an act of violence using sex as a weapon. In the same way, a pedophile abusing a child of the same sex is not perpetrating a homosexual act but an act of violence and exploitation using sexuality. There is a world of difference between these two things, but it requires a subtle understanding of the inner motivation of the abuser.

To call child molestation of a boy by a man “homosexual,” or that of a girl by a man “heterosexual,” is to misunderstand pedophilia. No true pedophile is attracted to adults, so neither homosexuality nor heterosexuality applies. Accordingly, Herek suggests calling men’s sexual abuse of boys “male-male molestation,” and men’s abuse of girls “male-female molestation.”

Interestingly, Anna C. Salter writes, in Predators, Pedophiles, Rapists and other Sex Offenders, that when a man molests little girls, we call him a “pedophile” and not a “heterosexual.” Of course, when a man molests little boys, people say outright, or mutter under their breath, “homosexual.” Herek writes that because of our society’s aversion to male homosexuality, and the attempts made by some to represent gay men as a danger to “family values,” many in our society immediately think of male-male molestation as homosexuality. He compares this to the time when African-Americans were often falsely accused of raping white women, and when medieval Jews were accused of murdering Christian babies in ritual sacrifices. Both are examples of how mainstream society eagerly jumped to conclusions that justified discrimination and violence against these minorities. Today, gays face the same kind of prejudice.

Most recently, we’ve seen gay men unfairly turned out of the Boy Scouts of America on the basis of this myth that gay men are likely to be child molesters. Keeping gays out of scouting won’t protect boys from pedophiles.

In reality, abuse of boys by gay pedophiles is rare, and the abuse of girls by lesbians is rarer still. Nicholas Groth is a noted authority on this topic. In a 1982 study Groth writes:

Are homosexual adults in general sexually attracted to children, and are pre-adolescent children at greater risk of molestation from homosexual adults than from heterosexual adults? There is no reason to believe so. The research to date all points to there being no significant relationship between a homosexual lifestyle and child molestation.

There appears to be practically no reportage of sexual molestation of girls by lesbian adults, and the adult male who sexually molests young boys is not likely to be homosexual.

Herek writes, similarly, that abuse of boys by gay men is rare, and that the abuse of girls by lesbians is rarer still.

The topic of female-female molestation continues to be largely ignored. There are few books on female sex offenders, particularly about mothers sexually abusing their daughters. I can find no books on mothers who sexually abuse their sons. There is one book by Hani Miletski, M.S.W., entitled Mother-Son Incest: The Unthinkable Taboo. Unthinkable is an appropriate word — so much so that there is nothing else in the literature on this topic, even though female pedophiles and female child molesters certainly exist.

We know so much more than we did historically and yet have a long way to go. We can understand child sexual abuse further when people’s bias and prejudice are removed and the evidence is empirical and scientific.

[Raggamuffin]

Statistics show that straight people are much more apt to engage in predatory sexual behavior.

Do you have these statistics?

[Andy]

Statistics show that straight people are much more apt to engage in predatory sexual behavior.

Do you have these statistics?

Would you take any notice or even believe the stats if and when Quill posts them?
I doubt it.

[Syl]

That may have been the implication I dont know, but it's the way Quill and Didge then proceed with the thread concentrating on something that hasn't actually been said that makes it wrong.

Honestly Syl, use some logic.  Who care’s what’s been said by tommy and his cronies.  Heed the experts:

Homosexuality and Pedophila: The False Link

Joe Kort, Ph.D., Certified Sex and Relationship Therapist

Updated Feb 02, 2016

It is so hard to believe that people are still trying to use the purported link between pedophilia and homosexuality. The old, tired argument that pedophilia is linked with homosexuality is wrong on many levels.

First, we need to clarify our definitions. When discussing sexual abuse and molestation of children, there’s often conflict over terminology. One frequently quoted researcher on the topic of homosexuality and child molestation, Gregory Herek, a research psychologist at the University of California, defines pedophilia as “a psychosexual disorder characterized by a preference for prepubescent children as sexual partners, which may or may not be acted upon.” He defines child sexual abuse as “actual sexual contact between an adult and someone who has not reached the legal age of consent.” Not all pedophiles actually molest children, he points out. A pedophile may be attracted to children but never actually engage in sexual contact with them. Quite often, pedophiles never develop a sexual orientation toward other adults.

Herek points out that child molestation and child sexual abuse refer to “actions,” without implying any “particular psychological makeup or motive on the part of the perpetrator.” In other words, not all incidents of child sexual abuse are perpetrated by pedophiles. Pedophilia can be viewed as a kind of sexual fetish, wherein the person requires the mental image of a child — not necessarily a flesh-and-blood child — to achieve sexual gratification.

Rarely does a pedophile experience sexual desire for adults of either gender. They usually don’t identify as homosexual; the majority identify as heterosexual, even those who abuse children of the same gender. They are sexually aroused by extreme youth, not by gender.

In contrast, child molesters often exert power and control over children in an effort to dominate them. They do experience sexual desire for adults but molest children episodically, for reasons apart from sexual desire, much as rapists enjoy power, violence, and controlling their humiliated victims. Indeed, research strongly suggests that a child molester isn’t any more likely to be homosexual than heterosexual.

In fact, some research shows that for pedophiles, the gender of the child is immaterial. Accessibility is more the factor in whom a pedophile abuses. This may explain the high incidence of children molested in church communities and fraternal organizations, where the pedophile may more easily have access to children.

In these situations, an adult male is trusted by those around him, including children and their families. Males are often given access to boys to mentor, teach, coach, and advise. Therefore, a male pedophile may have easier access to a male child. In trying to make sense of an adult male’s sexually abusing a male child, many of us mislabel it as an act of homosexuality, which it isn’t.

Feminists have argued for years that rape is not a sex act but an act of violence using sex as a weapon. In the same way, a pedophile abusing a child of the same sex is not perpetrating a homosexual act but an act of violence and exploitation using sexuality. There is a world of difference between these two things, but it requires a subtle understanding of the inner motivation of the abuser.

To call child molestation of a boy by a man “homosexual,” or that of a girl by a man “heterosexual,” is to misunderstand pedophilia. No true pedophile is attracted to adults, so neither homosexuality nor heterosexuality applies. Accordingly, Herek suggests calling men’s sexual abuse of boys “male-male molestation,” and men’s abuse of girls “male-female molestation.”

Interestingly, Anna C. Salter writes, in Predators, Pedophiles, Rapists and other Sex Offenders, that when a man molests little girls, we call him a “pedophile” and not a “heterosexual.” Of course, when a man molests little boys, people say outright, or mutter under their breath, “homosexual.” Herek writes that because of our society’s aversion to male homosexuality, and the attempts made by some to represent gay men as a danger to “family values,” many in our society immediately think of male-male molestation as homosexuality. He compares this to the time when African-Americans were often falsely accused of raping white women, and when medieval Jews were accused of murdering Christian babies in ritual sacrifices. Both are examples of how mainstream society eagerly jumped to conclusions that justified discrimination and violence against these minorities. Today, gays face the same kind of prejudice.

Most recently, we’ve seen gay men unfairly turned out of the Boy Scouts of America on the basis of this myth that gay men are likely to be child molesters. Keeping gays out of scouting won’t protect boys from pedophiles.

In reality, abuse of boys by gay pedophiles is rare, and the abuse of girls by lesbians is rarer still. Nicholas Groth is a noted authority on this topic. In a 1982 study Groth writes:

Are homosexual adults in general sexually attracted to children, and are pre-adolescent children at greater risk of molestation from homosexual adults than from heterosexual adults? There is no reason to believe so. The research to date all points to there being no significant relationship between a homosexual lifestyle and child molestation.

There appears to be practically no reportage of sexual molestation of girls by lesbian adults, and the adult male who sexually molests young boys is not likely to be homosexual.

Herek writes, similarly, that abuse of boys by gay men is rare, and that the abuse of girls by lesbians is rarer still.

The topic of female-female molestation continues to be largely ignored. There are few books on female sex offenders, particularly about mothers sexually abusing their daughters. I can find no books on mothers who sexually abuse their sons. There is one book by Hani Miletski, M.S.W., entitled Mother-Son Incest: The Unthinkable Taboo. Unthinkable is an appropriate word — so much so that there is nothing else in the literature on this topic, even though female pedophiles and female child molesters certainly exist.

We know so much more than we did historically and yet have a long way to go. We can understand child sexual abuse further when people’s bias and prejudice are removed and the evidence is empirical and scientific.

I am only stating what was said in the thread Quill.
If a debate goes off on a tangent because someone has mistakenly or deliberately twisted what someone else has said it's a false debate imo.

Personally I think paedophiles are probably born that way, I wouldn't link them specifically with either homo or hetrosexuals….I link them more with desiring youngsters.

[Raggamuffin]

Do you have these statistics?

Would you take any notice or even believe the stats if and when Quill posts them?
I doubt it.

Let's see if he posts them first. After all, it was him who introduced this particular issue.

[Original Quill]

Honestly Syl, use some logic.  Who care’s what’s been said by tommy and his cronies.  Heed the experts:

I am only stating what was said in the thread Quill.
If a debate goes off on a tangent because someone has mistakenly or deliberately twisted what someone else has said it's a false debate imo.

Personally I think paedophiles are probably born that way, I wouldn't link them specifically with either homo or hetrosexuals….I link them more with desiring youngsters.

Trust me...the above is what I have to say about pǽdophiles. Anything else is inclusive...or extraneous.

[Syl]

I am only stating what was said in the thread Quill.
If a debate goes off on a tangent because someone has mistakenly or deliberately twisted what someone else has said it's a false debate imo.

Personally I think paedophiles are probably born that way, I wouldn't link them specifically with either homo or hetrosexuals….I link them more with desiring youngsters.

Trust me...the above is what I have to say about pǽdophiles.  Anything else is inclusive...or extraneous.

I agree with the piece you quoted, that's not what I was pointing out though.
Never mind, the thread has moved on now anyway.

[Original Quill]

Trust me...the above is what I have to say about pǽdophiles.  Anything else is inclusive...or extraneous.

Never mind, the thread has moved on now anyway.

I agree.

[JulesV]

@Ben - I wonder if you would consider scrapping the red thing, and just leaving the green?

I know it's not an issue of massive importance but it's annoying cos it encourages secrecy, spite & snidy behaviour. 

People should be articulate enough to say what they think in words, and upfront enough to actually say it.

Greens aren't any better. I've seen people get a green for the most abusive posts.

Imo they are better. There's still far more positivity around greens than reds. 
Neither you nor I nor anyone else can control the reasons others choose to 'like'/upvote a post.  It's their personal choice.

[Raggamuffin]

Greens aren't any better. I've seen people get a green for the most abusive posts.

Imo they are better. There's still far more positivity around greens than reds. 
Neither you nor I nor anyone else can control the reasons others choose to 'like'/upvote a post.  It's their personal choice.

IMO greens are often used to suck up to someone, often when that person has abused someone else. If you don't like my opinion, that's your problem.

I never really know if I've had reds or greens really as it happens after I've moved on in a thread.

[JulesV]

 If you don't like my opinion, that's your problem.  

This is hilarious.
I'm the one who should be saying that to you as it is  YOU who approached me in this thread to tell me your opinion.
All I did was REPLY to you. Calm the F down.

[Raggamuffin]

 If you don't like my opinion, that's your problem.  

This is hilarious.  
I'm the one who should be saying that to you as it is  YOU who approached me in this thread to tell me your opinion.
All I did was REPLY to you. Calm the F down.

You brought up the subject for no apparent reason - it was totally random and off topic. I'm perfectly calm, it's you who seems to be getting het up.

[JulesV]

This is hilarious.  
I'm the one who should be saying that to you as it is  YOU who approached me in this thread to tell me your opinion.
All I did was REPLY to you. Calm the F down.

You brought up the subject for no apparent reason - it was totally random and off topic. I'm perfectly calm, it's you who seems to be getting het up.

Who are you to decide if my reason is good enough?
Why do you consider it your business if I decide to bring up a topic? Do I need your permission?

[Raggamuffin]

You brought up the subject for no apparent reason - it was totally random and off topic. I'm perfectly calm, it's you who seems to be getting het up.

Who are you to decide if my reason is good enough?
Why do you consider it your business if I decide to bring up a topic? Do I need your permission?

Yes you do. Now stop being so silly.

[JulesV]

You brought up the subject for no apparent reason -
it was totally random and off topic

Horse shit.
Visit an optician!






This is how the topic started, Raggamuffin.  It was the mod who brought it up, not me.
My post was a direct reaction to the mod's post > >

Also, I got a red stripe above, I see. Anyone want to own it and explain why?

His post sparked off a reaction from several people, not just me.
Got it, Raggamuffin?
I don't dictate to you what you should talk about, so kindly afford me the same courtesy.
Thank you.

[Raggamuffin]

Good grief - you're so obsessive Jules. You bumped the issue of stripes ages after I posted about it, and now you're obsessing over it again. Grow up.

[JulesV]

Good grief - you're so obsessive Jules. You bumped the issue of stripes ages after I posted about it, and now you're obsessing over it again. Grow up.

I don't post here every single day.
Been a few days since I last posted here.
Hence the reason for the time lapse in me replying!


Replying to posts is precisely what forums are about. Nowt obsessive about that.
I don't take kindly to being bossed about,  or bogus accusations tho.

[Raggamuffin]

Good grief - you're so obsessive Jules. You bumped the issue of stripes ages after I posted about it, and now you're obsessing over it again. Grow up.

I don't post here every single day.
Been a few days since I last posted here.
Hence the reason for the time lapse in me replying!


Replying to posts is precisely what forums are about. Nowt obsessive about that.
I don't take kindly to being bossed about,  or bogus accusations tho.

Away with you.

[JulesV]

I'm going no where! 

[Original Quill]

You brought up the subject for no apparent reason - it was totally random and off topic. I'm perfectly calm, it's you who seems to be getting het up.

Who are you to decide if my reason is good enough?
Why do you consider it your business if I decide to bring up a topic? Do I need your permission?

Raggs is our designated 'official' intermeddler.

[Tommy Monk]

Nothing.

But for an extremist like him, treating gay people like everyone else is not right. We should be discriminated against.

He is blinded by hate.

Also, I got a red stripe above, I see. Anyone want to own it and explain why?

I have already explained that I think homosexuals should be free from oppression and persecution etc...

Homosexuality should be decriminalised... not normalised... and not taught to children as a normal or natural lifestyle choice... homosexuality should not be promoted in schools in any way, which was what section 28 was about ensuring... and adoptive children should only be placed with a mother and a father in a normal and natural heterosexual relationship...


Simple straight forward common sense middle of the road view on it all!

My earlier points before the thread got diverted...

[Tommy Monk]

Nothing.

But for an extremist like him, treating gay people like everyone else is not right. We should be discriminated against.

He is blinded by hate.

Also, I got a red stripe above, I see. Anyone want to own it and explain why?

I'm more than happy to treat homosexuals like everyone else...


Find a partner of the opposite sex and get married, if you want... just like everyone else... homosexuality wasn't decriminalised so as to allow homosexuals to start getting married... marriage is between a man and a woman... anything else is an absurdity...


If you are in a loving and stable relationship that can provide a mother and a father to a child needing to be adopted... then you are more than welcome to apply... just like everyone else who is able to fulfil these requirements in the best interests of the child... homosexuality wasn't decriminalised so as to allow homosexuals to adopt children into their perverse relationship in order to somehow seek to validate and legitimise it, and with total disregard of the best interests of the vulnerable child concerned, who's best interests would only be served by being placed with a mother and a father...!


Schools should only teach the explaination of the fundamental basics of sex education of the normal and natural kind that is the basis of reproduction of all humans and animals as well as explaining plant life reproduction... and to explain the basics of how to have safe sex that avoids unwanted pregnancies and protection against STDs... and it is not the job of schools to advocate/promote any other abnormal/unnatural/deviant sexual practices to children... this gives the same basic knowledge to everyone about the way everybody in life and in history has come to be in existence... which is all that needs to be said...

More of my earlier points...

[eddie]

Nothing.

But for an extremist like him, treating gay people like everyone else is not right. We should be discriminated against.

He is blinded by hate.

Also, I got a red stripe above, I see. Anyone want to own it and explain why?

I have already explained that I think homosexuals should be free from oppression and persecution etc...

Homosexuality should be decriminalised... not normalised... and not taught to children as a normal or natural lifestyle choice... homosexuality should not be promoted in schools in any way, which was what section 28 was about ensuring... and adoptive children should only be placed with a mother and a father in a normal and natural heterosexual relationship...


Simple straight forward common sense middle of the road view on it all!

My earlier points before the thread got diverted...

“Homosexuality should be Decriminalised and not normalised”

That’s what you said.

So what is normal?

[gelico]

Nothing.

But for an extremist like him, treating gay people like everyone else is not right. We should be discriminated against.

He is blinded by hate.

Also, I got a red stripe above, I see. Anyone want to own it and explain why?

I'm more than happy to treat homosexuals like everyone else...


Find a partner of the opposite sex and get married, if you want... just like everyone else... homosexuality wasn't decriminalised so as to allow homosexuals to start getting married... marriage is between a man and a woman... anything else is an absurdity...


If you are in a loving and stable relationship that can provide a mother and a father to a child needing to be adopted... then you are more than welcome to apply... just like everyone else who is able to fulfil these requirements in the best interests of the child... homosexuality wasn't decriminalised so as to allow homosexuals to adopt children into their perverse relationship in order to somehow seek to validate and legitimise it, and with total disregard of the best interests of the vulnerable child concerned, who's best interests would only be served by being placed with a mother and a father...!


Schools should only teach the explaination of the fundamental basics of sex education of the normal and natural kind that is the basis of reproduction of all humans and animals as well as explaining plant life reproduction... and to explain the basics of how to have safe sex that avoids unwanted pregnancies and protection against STDs... and it is not the job of schools to advocate/promote any other abnormal/unnatural/deviant sexual practices to children... this gives the same basic knowledge to everyone about the way everybody in life and in history has come to be in existence... which is all that needs to be said...

see, i like you tommy, i like you quite a lot actually but i totally disagree with this and i can fully understand why les doesn't. your attitude reminds me of my dad's. he's a wonderful man and i love him for so many reasons but his attitude baffles me

i've always thought les would make a great dad. he has a lot to offer a child

i also think that genuine love is a beautiful, powerful emotion that should be celebrated. so what if that love is between two people of the same sex.

who is it hurting exactly?

how does it affect your life on a personal level?

[Tommy Monk]

Let them get on with "loving each other" as much as they like, and free from persecution etc...


But my points above still stand...!

[Guest]

Let them get on with "loving each other" as much as they like, and free from persecution etc...


But my points above still stand...!

How about free from prejudice and discrimination?

Which you have done throughout here?

[Tommy Monk]

I'm more than happy to treat homosexuals like everyone else... 


Find a partner of the opposite sex and get married, if you want... just like everyone else... homosexuality wasn't decriminalised so as to allow homosexuals to start getting married... marriage is between a man and a woman... anything else is an absurdity... 


If you are in a loving and stable relationship that can provide a mother and a father to a child needing to be adopted... then you are more than welcome to apply... just like everyone else who is able to fulfil these requirements in the best interests of the child... homosexuality wasn't decriminalised so as to allow homosexuals to adopt children into their perverse relationship in order to somehow seek to validate and legitimise it, and with total disregard of the best interests of the vulnerable child concerned, who's best interests would only be served by being placed with a mother and a father...!


Schools should only teach the explaination of the fundamental basics of sex education of the normal and natural kind that is the basis of reproduction of all humans and animals as well as explaining plant life reproduction... and to explain the basics of how to have safe sex that avoids unwanted pregnancies and protection against STDs... and it is not the job of schools to advocate/promote any other abnormal/unnatural/deviant sexual practices to children... this gives the same basic knowledge to everyone about the way everybody in life and in history has come to be in existence... which is all that needs to be said... 

[gelico]

Let them get on with "loving each other" as much as they like, and free from persecution etc...


But my points above still stand...!

see why the quote marks, tommy? what was the need for that?

and you say free from persecution etc, what does that mean? free from jail, is one thing but you still think it's acceptable and perfectly ok to refer to les's relationship as a perversion.

how is it ok to make someone else feel somehow substandard, that their marriage their love, their committment to each other is a perversion

that's not cool tommy

and as for your so called points

no, they do not still stand - they fall down like world weary drunks

they are outdated, illogical, backward and cruel

there

[Guest]

And again Tommy this shows you fail to see how you are still prejudiced and discriminating towards homosexuals by your views throughout?

I mean saying homosexual people cannot adopt is prejudiced and discrimination

Saying a homosexual relationship as being perverse is very hateful, prejudiced and discrimination. Claiming this is not having the best interest of the child at heart, is sheer ignorance on your part. Its not backed by any sound reason, its simple a view of hate, prrejudice and discrimination

To then say schools should not teach basically inclusion and understand that some people are homosexual in school. Ignores that some of those kids are homosexual, have homosexual parents or family and friends who are. Again hence prejudice and discrimination

Your views are not criticism, they are blatantly hatefu, prejudiced and discrimination

[Eilzel]

And again Tommy this shows you fail to see how you are still prejudiced and discriminating towards homosexuals by your views throughout?

I mean saying homosexual people cannot adopt is prejudiced and discrimination

Saying a homosexual relationship as being perverse is very hateful, prejudiced and discrimination. Claiming this is not having the best interest of the child at heart, is sheer ignorance on your part. Its not backed by any sound reason, its simple a view of hate, prrejudice and discrimination

To then say schools should not teach basically inclusion and understand that some people are homosexual in school. Ignores that some of those kids are homosexual, have homosexual parents or family and friends who are. Again hence prejudice and discrimination

Your views are not criticism, they are blatantly hatefu, prejudiced and discrimination

Truth

[Guest]

Let them get on with "loving each other" as much as they like, and free from persecution etc...


But my points above still stand...!

see why the quote marks, tommy?  what was the need for that?

and you say free from persecution etc, what does that mean?  free from jail, is one thing but you still think it's acceptable and perfectly ok to refer to les's relationship as a perversion.

how is it ok to make someone else feel somehow substandard, that their marriage their love, their committment to each other is a perversion

that's not cool tommy

and as for your so called points

no, they do not still stand - they fall down like world weary drunks

they are outdated, illogical, backward and cruel

there

Gave you a thanks Gelico, good points

@Eilzel thanks mate

[Tommy Monk]

Let them get on with "loving each other" as much as they like, and free from persecution etc...


But my points above still stand...!

see why the quote marks, tommy?  what was the need for that?

and you say free from persecution etc, what does that mean?  free from jail, is one thing but you still think it's acceptable and perfectly ok to refer to les's relationship as a perversion.

how is it ok to make someone else feel somehow substandard, that their marriage their love, their committment to each other is a perversion

that's not cool tommy

and as for your so called points

no, they do not still stand - they fall down like world weary drunks

they are outdated, illogical, backward and cruel

there

Firstly... that is what decriminalisation is all about...

Secondly... isn't it more the case that all the normal heterosexuals and the sanctity of marriage and the coupling that creates the miracle of life, is being undermined and made to feel as being of a lower standard by reclassifying it as somehow being the same as the abnormal and unnatural relationship between a couple of homosexuals...!?


And trying to force everyone else to play along with the bullshit, and forcibly teaching children that wrong is right...


That is the real insult that is going on!!!


As I said before... decriminalised doesn't mean normalised!!!

[Sponsored content]