*Warning: Disturbing/NSFW* Conflicted, upsetting. Maybe it's someone else, but I don't think so.

One pedophile turning on the other to try to save the face that they don't have, how ironic.

I wouldn't trust Fillip Hannisdan as far as I can throw him, he so obviously did it and after all these pages we have no clue what these alleged drawings even contained, the only reason he's not locked up for years is because the British Court System is backlogged with cases, so they have to give out tooons of community service sentences.

Going after someone for drawings of kids having sex? They have barely enough resources to go after real images of abuse, unless the system is completely brain-dead. I honestly wouldn't be surprised with the U.K. tbh, they love to create the illusion that they're making things better while ignoring real problems.

And if you actually read the article, he self-admitted himself into a support group / therapy sessions out of his own volition made specifically to stop people looking at abuse imagery and jumping on people. The court didn't order this, so he is obviously having some sort of problem.

I'll give him credit for actually trying to tackle the problem, but really, he should have done it a long time ago before... Oh hey, the police have caught me, well I guess I have to stop now, damn it.

I still think the law against drawings is stupid.

 

I did a little bit of research into the subject, otherwise we really will be turning into a bunch of talking heads pulling arguments out of thin air.

Their brains are structured such that instead of getting nurturing instincts upon seeing children, they instead feel sexual desire. They have done brain scans confirming this. There is no known cure for severe cases other than administering anti-androgens to artificially reduce their sex drive or teaching them impulse control and empathy.

Nowhere did it say however that this is the common case, in many cases it even suggested that many with this condition opt not to look at those images out of the same sense of morality that everyone else has and that some manage these impulses via more acceptable content that doesn't harm anyone.

It also noted that isolation can bolster these impulses and that when looking for content to sate that they can stumble upon the echo chambers noted by Vekseid where they teach each other that raping kids is fine and perfectly acceptable.

I strongly maintain that it is largely their personal responsibility that led to this situation and that they could have managed it accordingly. Perhaps, they could be rehabilitated, but I'm not going to pretend that they are faultless.

I'm going to wash my hands now and try to think of something on a lighter note. Too dark.

 

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1466A

https://blog.discordapp.com/maintai...ord-with-over-200-million-people-f0b39adfc00c

It is illegal. Would not host. Ever.

 

Oh, what the hell, I'll drop down some references just in case someone bumps this out of the blue in five months.

https://www.medicaldaily.com/inside...al-differences-those-who-harm-children-402364
Brain scans, first thing that came up in the search results.
With any luck, we'll be able to find them before they go out and stir up trouble on the streets.

There's one about cartoons particularly being beneficial, but it isn't in English.

https://metro.co.uk/2016/11/17/non-...-all-paedophiles-are-child-molesters-6263925/
Some alledgedly don't commit any crimes. This is clever wording of course because they don't consider non-pornographic images of kids a crime or cartoons.

https://www.cracked.com/personal-ex...ed-infiltrating-deep-web-child-molesters.html
A forum from hell. This is why I am so inclined not to give Filip and Ian any sympathy. Perhaps, they can be rehabilitated and perhaps they went to a different one, but these people are absolutely terrifying. You may find this article extremely disturbing and upsetting.

I'm not convinced all the people who look at even the extreme cartoons are actually paedophiles, but paedophilia is no minor matter.

 

I'll put it another way then.

People talk about rehabilitation as if it will prevent people doing these things, but in many cases, the support services simply shunt them onto alternative media as opposed to the abusive ones and try to avoid them escalating to physical crimes. The Lucy Faithful Foundation, with the exception of their branch in the United Kingdom, which operates "Stop it now" which is the most popular one do this.

I would suggest not having unrealistic expectations about what treatment they will and won't get and how they will turn out in the end.

 

Liam W That isn't entirely true, there are thoughts that are criminal or which will incur forced corrective action under the UK's Mental Health Act. For instance, if you hear voices inside your head, then that could very well be a "thought", but it could still be something that society believes necessitates some level of intervention.

Someone could well decide that they would prefer to have these thoughts, as they believe that any measures are ineffective or otherwise invasive or have worse side-effects. Society on the other-hand may have different designs.

Well, I'll leave it up-to the experts to figure it out, but if they thought someone was really dangerous due to that, then they always have the option of putting them away in a padded cell.

 

There was a Canadian scientist that says it occurs during pregnancy, so likely not, although it is looking to have multiple causes.

The choice is generally lock them away in a mental hospital and throw away the key or pray that the ones you don't lock away are low risk enough that they don't strike and try to reduce the chances of them striking.

As for why they are not all thrown in a mental hospital, there are too many of them and it is impossible to find them without also throwing random parents in prison for taking images one misconstrues to be "dangerous". Considering that the U.K. put someone on a list for BDSM however, it isn't something that would be particularly surprising.

Locking someone away or otherwise penalising them also disincentivizes them from getting treatment. Canada tried that and they just fled for the hills.

 

It's not new. It's been around over and over since 2011 or so, I vaguely recall stories of missing parts of the brain in the media or whatever even when I was in school, which kind of goes back to the old adage that a lot of people in prison in general have brain damage or some mental problem. There was a paper showing a statistical correlation between head injuries and ending up in prison.

And research has a lot of problems in general as a lot of scientists go in looking for a specific result and they have a tendency of joining lines how they please. This isn't talking specifically about this. There is also https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-02960-3 which goes into how journals like to publish results that look prestigious more than anything else. You are right that science can be dodgy in general.