Paedophile is not a word

 Posted by on February 27, 2007  Add comments
Feb 272007
 

Let’s get this nonsense out of the way right now.

Paedophile is not a word. I remember when the perverts invented it about twenty-five years ago to cover up what they really do, which is the rape of children. The perverts started this thing they called the Paedophile Information Exchange, because they thought Paedophile would be a more acceptable term than Miserable child-raping bastard.

Look at the etymology: it means child lover. These people are anything but that. They are child haters, or paedophobes, and that is what we should be calling them instead of using their own perverted terminology. So from now on, I’m going to say paedophobe.

Right. That’s that out of the way. On to current events.

Unless you live on Alpha Centauri or Ferbane, you must have heard the awful story about the young boy who seems to have been the victim of a ring of paedophobes. For obvious reasons, I shouldn’t mention the details of the case for fear somebody’s trial would be prejudiced and the miserable pieces of shit would get off on a technicality. Therefore, I’ll only talk about what was reported in the mass media.

It seems that a vigilant mother found inappropriate text messages on her fourteen-year-old son’s phone and went to the police about them. It further seems that up to ten men might have been involved some way in sexually abusing this child. Sensationally, it appears that a young policeman has been suspended because he is suspected of befriending the boy in order to draw him into this circle of perverts. This is looking more and more like an organised thing, the same as the Dalkey horror I wrote about recently.

My first comment is this. What a wonderful woman the boy’s mother is to confront this thing head on.

Secondly, what kind of godawful bastard would hurt a child?

Thirdly, it’s just as well I have no power in this country, because I would feed these people into a tractor’s gearbox feet first if I had the chance, and I wouldn’t lose a second’s sleep over it.

I am furious right now, and it isn’t good for me. Do you remember when the schools first introduced the Stay Safe programme? Do you remember the opposition of the Catholic Right to its introduction? I do. I remember it very well. I remember these loud, domineering holy-joes telling us that not only would they prevent their own kids from finding out about child abuse, but by Jesus, they were going to stop my kids from taking part as well.

I hope they’re proud of themselves, the miserable sanctimonious bastards. They lost and good riddance to them, but they haven’t gone away, you know.

  12 Responses to “Paedophile is not a word”

Comments (12)
  1.  

    Well said, Bock. As someone who has taught Stay Safe and experienced it as a parent also, I have to say that it is a fantastic programme. It pains me to say that some teachers still refuse to teach it and many parents refuse to allow it be taught. Why? It has to be complete ignorance of the programme. There’s nothing bad in it. It does what it says on the tin – empowers our kids to STAY SAFE from predators, bullies and other skunks!
    Then again it is an irrefutable truth that our RC Church has flourished on ignorance and they like to keep us that way, including our kids.
    I’m really mad too. I feel Taz coming over me again!

  2.  

    May I just chip in and say you’re on some kind of a roll. When the anger rises, you write fantastically, and in a way that’s impossible to ignore.

    If beating England every weekend is what it takes for this to continue, bring it on.

  3.  

    Mairéad: sorry for making you so mad all the time. Next time, I’ll try to make you laugh.

    Badgerdaddy: Thanks. I’m all right now.

  4.  

    I call them targets for execution myself.

  5.  

    Debollock the cunts.

  6.  

    I know you aren’t going to post this comment, but paedophilia is actually a word coined by Kurt Freund more than 100 years ago and it means a sexual attraction to pre-pubescent children. The fact that you can’t understand the difference between an attraction and an action makes you a monster, IMO.

    http://anu.nfshost.com/

  7.  

    I agree with and applaud your anger but why the distinction between paedophilia and abuser (even though they can and are the same issue from the perspective of the child) is important is when it comes to treatment. Let me state clearly that I am not excusing this behaviour I am merely trying to outline the context. Like or dislike the word – paedophilia is a sexual orientation – not only an abusive act. Paedophilia is incredibly difficult to treat because of this. For example – if someone were to tell you that your hetrosexual or homosexual orientation was a crime (and it’s not too long ago since that was the case in terms of the latter) you would justifiably take issue with me and reject it because that’s the way you are biologically wired. Paedophiles are sexually attracted to children and most if not all of them cannot maintain a sexual or emotional relationship with an adult. They are hardwired that way. We have to start dealing with this as a fact and only then can we start dealing with the appalling behavioural outcomes.

    The most that treatment can hope for with paedophilia is that behaviour is modified – not cured. Only a small number of sexual abusers are paedophiles – most abusers have been victims of abuse (and this is NOT saying that all victims have been abusers) and this kind of behaviour is not hard wired it is socially and behaviourally learnt therefore it can be unlearnt with appropriate therapeutic intervention.

    It is in nobody’s interest to confuse these two types of abuse because one can respond to therapy with some success the other can’t.

    The real issue is the scandalous lack of therapeuetic intervention and support for (a) victims of abuse – most of whom are abused by a stranger in or near the home and (b) abusers who are caught.

    Locking people up is fine if it makes us all feel “safe in our beds” but it’s avoiding the real issues.

  8.  

    In respence to above comment from THATGIRL

    The fact that any comparison between Homosexuality & Paedophilia is a farce.
    If two consenting adults of the same sex wish to engage in sexual activity then all power to them. Lash away!!!
    However, at the point that consent is taken out of the equation, serious repercussions are required. Any person (I use this term very loosely) who sexually abuses another should be killed. Now if the abused person happens to be an innocent child, the scumbag in question should be put to a slow, painful death.

    Why should anyone who abuses children or anyone for that matter be offered the compassion of “treatment”???
    Surely it would only benefit society on a whole if these bastards were disposed of.

    Why should the normal Joe Public tax payer foot the bill to “treat” & imprison this kind of scum??? As it stands, we are paying for a number of these f*ckers to be fed & housed in our prisons. This is after they have destroyed the life of their victim!!!! How can that be justified?

    Public stonings should be put in place for these scumbags, even that would be a far too dignified death!!!

  9.  

    Try as I might, I find it difficult to disagree with you.

  10.  

    There is also the reality of evil. Some clergy choose sex with a minor as a way of satisfying themselves, while maintaining their clerical status. They choose to abuse. These priests are not demented; nor driven by uncontrollable urges. They are not out-of-control.

    The above is a quote from Barry M. Coldrey’s
    Religious Life Without Integrity. The Sexual Abuse Crisis in the Catholic Church.

    http://ncane.com/v4d

  11.  

    Andrew,

    There are no viable reasons or excues for sexual abuse.

    I do not think that there is any justification. I never have and I never will. Nor do I think any time should be wasted in the attemp to understand why these sickening acts take place.

    In dogs, there is a runt of the litter. I can only describe rapists, paedophiles, perverts etc as runts.

    Runts that should not be studied, or cared for.
    They should just be gotten rid of!

  12.  

    Hi bellend.

    I don’t think there are any excuses either for sexual abuse. I think the quote I used above makes that clear.

    In the vernacular maybe it should read: That abusers CHOOSE to abuse, they are NOT mad or demented or out-of-control. They are evil fuckers.

Leave a Reply