Pattaya Daily News

Patty, thank you for taking the time to respond in a slightly more rational manner and tone than the one you used in your original feature, however, there seems to be a lot of confusion concerning my points, but I will be glad to straighten them out for you.
--------But first, I find your shot about my spelling and grammar highly ironic, as your “features” as you call them are in no way perfect works of literary art, especially this second one. You are the one writing for a news source, not me.
---------- And to everyone else, please read all of this before you reply. It’s obvious that people reply before reading it all.
---------Patty, I find a lot of what you have written in this response really shows you know very little about the issues. Are you suggesting that if I had a child, (and I’m not saying I don’t) that that would “cure” me somehow? Maybe you missed all the times I said I don’t condone harm to children, and that child rapists and killers anger me as much as you. I said that several times. We can agree on that.
--------The problem I have with you, Patty, is that using the terminology you do, you are (again) lumping in all paedophiles with child killers, and forceable rapists, which is simply not the case, far from it. Study after study and numerous crime statistics bear this out. It is highly offensive to me personally to be considered in the same group as the people you describe, and I realize no one cares what I think or feel since I am a paedophile, but that’s not me. Again, just like most paedophiles, I could NEVER hurt a child.
--------Maybe one of the problems is the fact that the words we use here are not well defined. They need to be. To that end, can we all agree that a paedophile, generally, is a person with an ongoing physical attraction to a prepubescent child, usually considered under age 12. They need not commit any offense to be a paedophile. Only have the thoughts and attractions. This needs to be delineated from a child molester who is likely a peadophile that has sexually offended against a child. To be clear, most child molesters are paedophiles, and some molesters are psychopaths, but most paedophiles are NOT child molesters or psychopaths. Your use of the word “predator” is fine as you used it here. I think another user had an issue with that word. If you’re talking about someone who actively seeks relationships with children in order to gain and exploit trust, then yes. But by using the word “paedophile” you include non-offenders, people who can’t help who they are, only what they do about it. The problem is you only specify people who PREFERE children, not people who actually offend against them. Do you think I like to hear the endless stream of people calling for me to be tortured until dead? No of course you don’t, nor do you or most of your readers care what I think or feel because I am a peadophile I should by default be stripped of my rights on the mere suspicion I may offend.

-----Patty, you say that there is no anger intended in your original feature…but you say “Personally, I think these people who prefer children for their sexual pleasures should be given a lobotomy then thrown into an Asian prison for the rest of their lives or cheaper still, execute them. “ And you agree with the PM that they should be castrated? Like, actually have their penis cut off? Where are you, Pakistan? If that’s you not angry, I would hate to see what you would want to do to someone you’re actually angry at!
- --------Patty, your experience as a social worker, or whatever, clearly puts you in close and continued contact with victims that have undoubtedly been subjected to the worst kind of abuse, sexual and physical, and that has made you incredibly biased, just as you point out that I am biased having admitted to an affinity for underage girls. So again, I reiterate, your view, and the view of many, is of this very very small minority of peadophiles that act out in terrible ways. And as I said before, many of these worst of the worst aren’t even peadophiles, they are psychopaths. There is a big difference. Psychopaths are unable to function in society or maintain interpersonal relationships and often prey on the defenseless. You may use the word “predator” freely to describe this very small group. A true peadophile is as much, if not more, emotionally affected when they learn a child has been brutally abused or killed. Sorrow, anger and condolences gush forth from the paedophile chat rooms and forums when a high profile case surfaces in the media.
---------Patty you need to realize that paedophiles exist in much greater numbers than you realize, and the majority of us otherwise appear to you as average people. We are closet paedophiles. Many, if not most of us are socially adept. We are teachers, cops, priests, businessmen, and politicians. Paedophiles come from every socio-economic background and demographic. Rich,poor,black,white and Hispanic. Just watch “To catch a predator” and you will see what I mean. Like me, they have wide circle of friends from appropriate peer groups, have girlfriends, wives, families, have career s, are fathers, son’s, brothers, and uncles. They can be, and are, anyone.
------Patty you act like we are oceans apart in our views, but are you aware you practically quoted some of my comments I made previously? I wrote: “It is the offenders actions which put the victim in a situation where actions of parents or law enforcement can cause further, or even greater, suffering to the victim. This is still the fault and responsibility of the offender, as the adult, he or she presumably understands the consequences of his or her actions.” Then you wrote: “..it is YOU the adult, who are supposed to set examples to the younger generation, You(sic) who should reuse(sic) if approached by the child, though I doubt (a) young child would come forward …” To provide context to my quote, and it’s worth repeating, is that even if a peadophile justifies in his or her mind that sexual contact with a child is OK, (which, again, I don’t) there is no way to justify the consequences of subsequent ancillary consequences such as forcing the child to secrecy, and other trauma involved if/when the abuse is revealed. See Patty, we actually agree on quite a bit. Imagine the headlines: “Patty Brown agrees with Paedophiles.” lol
------You ask, “How can having sex with a young under aged child ever be accepted.(sic)” In a western world it can’t, I agree with you yet again! However I will again point out the fact that only in this current time period, and in this current society we live in (western) has the concept of adult-child sexual relationships become so abhorrent and rage inducing. Examples both current and historical abound of “sex with a young under aged child being accepted”. And again, I’m not providing this as a justification for offending; I am simply providing facts to the discussion for you to consider. An alternative perspective to broaden your horizons a bit. There is still some crazy stuff going on that will blow your western mind. Historically, even more so.
--------In many US states you can still get married at 13 with parental or court consent, in many more states it is 14. Hawaii’s age of consent was recently moved from 14 to 16. The current age of consent in Mexico, Chile, The Philippines, Panama, Paraquay, and fittingly The Vatican is 12, Japan, Syria, South Korea, and Spain; 13, Dozens more it is 14. In 2007 Peru lowered their age of consent from 17 to 14. In Canada it was raised from 12 to 14 in 1890, and in 2008 from 14 to 16 .
------It is still custom in many Asian cultures to marry off very young girls. I personally met a Vietnamese woman in my home country who was arrange-married when she was 13. This was in a western country mind you. The “husband” was much older and was eventually arrested.
-------And historically, take a look at Capt. Cooks accounts of the sexual habits of prelapsarian Polynesians, or the tribes of Papua New Guinea before colonization and enculturation, or some Native American Indians. Prior to western imposed morality, sex was for the most part taught, encouraged, and enjoyed at all ages in these societies. Japanese Monks taking boy lovers is believed by many to still be the practiced in some temples. In the states in 1895: “The age of consent in the U.S., determined by each state, ranged from seven years, in Delaware, to an average of 10 to 12 years” Look at the Roman Catholic Church at pretty much any point in history. Greece, Rome, the list goes on and on. In fact prior to the turn of the century, ages of consent around the world ranged from a low of around 8 to a high of 12. In many parts of Africa it is still common for girls as young as 7 to marry much older men. Take a look at Islam’s Sharia law for Christ’s sake. (forced child brides disgust me) Even the Talmud says a girl can marry at 3 years old. Just imagine how strange people from these societies would find our vilification of sex and legislated morality. I don’t advocate marriage at 3, or 13 for that matter. Just food for thought, that’s all.
------It seems that despite my best effort to present verifiable factual data relevant to this discussion, it is instantly written off simply as “How can you support child predators?” regardless of how many times I say I am not presenting this information to suggest paedophiles go and offend. I implicitly advised them not to, more than once But to have a rational discussion, you need context. Your original “feature” had none. Your perspective is dealing with a few of the worst cases. You are not a fair representation of the issue, an issue which is broad and complicated. It deserves more than the guttural, knee jerk response you and others give it. Paedophiles aren’t going away. There are alternatives to locking them up and throwing away the key, or “torturing them to death” as you put it. More on this in a bit------ You say that rational discussion is not possible. But why? Are you so guided by your emotions that you are incapable of rational thought? Surely that cannot be the case.

--------Which leads us to this little gem of a quote, which I find very interesting: “Some, if not most paedophiles cannot be ‘managed” no matter how much help they are given and it is these that are locked up, supposedly for good. It is these who are integrated back into the community to live amongst families.” The essay which I have linked below details exactly this and directly contradicts you. The essay is by a professor of criminology (NOT a psychologist or sociologist) concerning the post-incarceration of paedophile sex offenders. It details a new technique which enlists volunteers from the community to become part of a support group for the paedophile. Read it to find out how it worked out for the offenders. It brought a tear to my eye. THIS, Patty, is what I mean by rational and enlightened.!! 
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2006/jun/17/comment.prisonsandprobation
Someone was asking to provide links to studies or data on adult-child relationships:
http://www.narth.com/docs/whatapa.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_consent_manifestations_%28UK%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_consent_reform
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_Morality_and_the_Law
http://chnm.gmu.edu/cyh/teaching-modules/230?section=introduction

That first photo of the child holding the Englanistani's hand should be the new flag for Englanistan. Take a look around Thailand and SEA in general, it's full of Limey,Pedo scum.

Paedophiles have a mental disease,which is progressive and they need treatment. Castration does not work but adds to their frustration. Prison cures nothing. They should be kept in a secure psychiatric unit until they are cured or dead. There is no treatment at present,Let us work on this and not let them out until they are 100% cured.

Even if they bury it, it will arise later. They constitute a clear and present danger to society and should be euthenized.

They need to be put down.

sex perverts like this have no excuse except they are in human and deserve to be hung drawn and quartered they should not be allowed to live

We as parents must ensure the safety and welfare of our children at all times. Sadly Thailand does not enforce child protection concerning paedophilia, merely reacting to international pressure, especially from United States where in that country and other western nations crimes of this nature are vigourously prosecuted and the convicted paedophiles dealt with accordingly.

Paedos are never cured and they never change. In the USA, some States been dealing with them in a unique way that has received surprisingly little publicity; after their trial and conviction they are sentenced to prison, but when they complete their prison sentence they are still not released. They are then transferred to a psychiatric institution for "civil commitment." This can last indefinitely and it protects the public. I don't often defend the USA, but unlike England which keeps offender information confidential, in the USA if you have been convicted of a sex crime, especially one involving a child anyone can find out almost as easily as Googleing your name. These are public records and are put on line to protect the public. One of the few intelligent things the USA has done in the last 20 years.