Chicagoist: Chicago Firefighter and Coach Charged for Attempted Sexual Abuse

Spav1

Mon, 24 Mar 2008 10:51:30 -0600

I agree statistically that kids are MOST likely to be abused by someone they already know...but the first half of this thread comes off like it is COOL to have a sexual relationship with a 14 year old. Or whatever. Having sex with someone underage is a crime for a reason and should be punished harshly. Jesus. What about THE CHILDREN?

simplecreature

Mon, 24 Mar 2008 10:23:21 -0600

Kind of nice this didn't turn into a "Fck the pdofile!" series of posts. Smussy, you're absolutely correct. The fact that someone is having a shit time of it is no excuse. There are plenty of poor people who don't rob banks or shoplift to make up for their shit wages. The impetus is always on the adult, that's why the law is there. But the moral panic, and I think that term so perfectly applies to this subject, that sets in clouds rational thinking. Too many police departments are devoting huge swaths of time, energy and resources to "pedophile" stings when the preponderance of the evidence shows that children are far more likely to suffer abuse at the hands of relatives and family friends than some stranger danger doofus online. The people who want to plant locator chips in their kids and see even the most hapless or ridiculous of sex offenders put away for eternity are often the ones who don't put their kids in proper safety seats or know any of their children's teachers by name. Moral panic makes kids less safe.

smussy

Mon, 24 Mar 2008 01:33:46 -0600

here's the deal. everyone KNOWS that having sex with kids under the age of 18 is ILLEGAL. period. why even eff around with it? it's dangerous territory, and i feel like people who don't respect those boundaries have something bigger wrong with them than 'failure in their personal lives.' i regret not finishing college. my money situation is fucked. i don't have a significant other. yet, i don't have an interest in people the ages of 15-21 (and some of them are even legal!). i want sexual and intimate relations with adults near my own age. and to assume that a teenager can navigate the waters of sexual innuendo, intimate relationships, flirtation and sexual activity just because he or she knows what to *do* with their bodies (this goes for guys who sleep with their female teachers, too!) is preposterous given that most people in their 20s, 30s and 40s can't figure it out and end up all twisted over this person or that person. that's why it's ALWAYS on the head of the adult to show responsibilty, restraint and to retain control of themselves and any situation that has potential for sexual ambivalence/shadiness between them and another teenager.

Ward Up

Sun, 23 Mar 2008 22:07:10 -0600

Holy cow, Prescott, I just looked that up. You are right on target. Why haven't we heard more of that word? Or about the fact that hebophilia is different from pedophilia? Sure, some people might wisecrack about it referring to Jews, not teens. However, it is good to learn (sorry if I'm the only one new to that word) that there is a word for the lech who seeks post-pubescent teens.

Prescott Carlson

Sun, 23 Mar 2008 21:54:59 -0600

The term you're looking for is "hebophile".

Ward Up

Sun, 23 Mar 2008 20:41:15 -0600

I agree with simplecreature. Sure, true pedophiles--those yearning for undeveloped victims--deserve our harshest penalties and lifelong monitoring. However, there needs to be a different approach for men involved with girls 15-17. For these men, it seems that their families, careers, and abilities to pass screening for future jobs should not be forever destroyed. These men, or at least the vast majority, simply aren't attracted to younger girls. They are not going to cruising kindergarten parking lots. They have no interest in that. Sure, lock them up for a bit and monitor them. But don't wreck the lives of all the people around them in the process.

plumbum82

Sun, 23 Mar 2008 19:16:37 -0600

I will say there is a world of difference between someone who preys on 8 year olds and someone who hits on a 16 year old. But still, both are really creepy and both need to be punished. This is why I stick to MILF porn.

simplecreature

Sun, 23 Mar 2008 17:34:34 -0600

Before the moral panic sets in and everyone starts screaming PEDOPHILE! PEDOPHILE! GET THE ROPE!, maybe something calm can be said. This guy likely isn't a pedo with pics of little kids from the pool all around. He rationalized a bad idea. "Ok, so she's underage, but I won't touch her or do anything. We'll just talk." It grows from there. They talk about romance, the girl (or perhaps cop) starts taking it in a provocative direction, the guy keeps going, and much sooner than later he's said and done things that are massively, massively stupid. Life-altering, destructive and if you'd talked to him six months earlier, he likely would have denied even being capable of doing them. Point is, not all these cases are Chester the molester. Alot of them are men, and occasionally women, who make really poor choices. They're not acting out of sexual compulsion or mental illness. Often loneliness, failure in their personal lives. Hell, the film American Beauty all but glorified the older man's youthful obsession. I just hate seeing this all turn into "To Catch a Predator", when really it's more nuanced than that.

Spav1

Sun, 23 Mar 2008 16:43:52 -0600

I understand you are new, but in the category of terrible first sentences... to say that what he did was foolish totally marginalizes this man's terrlbe, alleged behavior. "In the category of creepy, criminal action"