What about the child rapists?

[Fragment]

So this question is targeted more to pro-c members, because I'm drawing a distinction between consensual and non-consensual acts that anti-c people don't believe exists (because minors can never consent, ever).

But what do we do about the people who are actually abusive? My experience being locked up and going through the court system makes me skeptical that prison is very beneficial. But I don't want kids being hurt, abused and tortured.

I ask this because there is a case right now of a man in Australia that is accused of over 70 crimes with 8 (or more) children in day care centers (meaning kids less than 6). The exact details are unknown (and it hasn't been revealed if it was boys, girls, or both) but it did involve penetration and he did film incidents while working as a day care teacher. I think all but the most extreme pro-c person would agree that what he did was wrong.

At the same time his offenses seem purely sexual and there are no other claims of violent abuse. There were no murders or anything.

How do you all feel about someone like that?

How should society deal with someone like that? What kind of punishment, consequence or treatment should there be?

How easy do you think it is to draw a clear line between what should and shouldn't be legal?

Even if we draw that line- how easily can our courts judge the different cases?

[PorcelainLark]

Probably what we currently have for sex offenders. A probation officer, rules about not working with children, and being monitored. For someone that consistently harms others, I think that's reasonable. Really it goes to show how overkill the laws are, that we apply the same rules meant to stop people like that to everything below that threshold.

Still, they should have a right to live as normal and fulfilling a life as possible as long as they aren't at risk of hurting more people. Either they'll change or they won't, but I'm skeptical that revenge would be the catalyst. There are people critical of apologies, they say "you aren't sorry about what you did, you're sorry you got caught," as though that's some sort of gotcha. Think that through, if they don't want to repeat an action because of painful consequences, is that the same as understanding why how they treated the victim was wrong? If they do understand and regret what happened, what purpose is the punishment serving (it seems like a formality at that point)? Alternatively, they fear neither punishment, nor do they feel regret, in which case you're potentially releasing someone dangerous back into society after an arbitrary length of time.
I don't really see the logic. Either a person is potentially dangerous in perpetuity, in which case you should be watching them in perpetuity, or they can be change in which case you try to change them, or they have changed in which case the law is superfluous.

[Fragment]

Think that through, if they don't want to repeat an action because of painful consequences, is that the same as understanding why how they treated the victim was wrong?

Basically "don't use your stick because I have a bigger stick than you". It's basically just "might makes right" as not just a descriptive but a normative claim.

The last line reminds me of the reason I'm against corporal punishment (even spanking) for children. If they are too young to be reasoned with then they also won't understand the link between their action and the spanking. If they are old enough to be receptive to logic, then you can reason with them without hitting.

Revenge is probably the strongest reason for judicial punishments. Deterrence is another. I think deterrence could be achieved by civil suits including hefty financial settlements.

[Harlan]

Rape should be prosecuted, but not with 20 year sentences (unless it is mass murder). Age-gap penetrative sex (penile-anal/penile-vaginal) should be prohibited until the age of 12. Masturbation is harmless and should NOT be prosecuted. There should be NO sex ofender registers.

[Fragment]

Masturbation is harmless and should NOT be prosecuted.

What if the kid says “no”? Or doesn’t say anything?

[Valerian]

Using physical violence to commit a forceful sexual act on a child should be classified primarily as child rape. This classification should clearly exclude any consensual or willing adolescent-adult sexual relations. All forms of physical violence, cruelty, torture, pain, and the infliction of suffering or misery on a child—whether sexual or non-sexual in nature—should fall under the category of child rape and warrant the most severe punishments. I hope people in the MAP forum adopt this central Child Protection resolution as their ideological principle.

Unfortunately, the present ruling establishment has constructed Child Sexual Abuse (CSA) laws in a way that misleads the public from the true principle of child protection. By making the term deliberately vague, they appear driven by vested political motives aimed at escaping their real responsibility: protecting children from physical violence and genuine suffering.

[Harlan]

Masturbation is harmless and should NOT be prosecuted.

What if the kid says “no”? Or doesn’t say anything?

No means No. Children refuse and agree to things every day and this is not regulated by a special separate law. Even current age of consent laws do NOT prohibit minors from atten ding nudist camps. How masturbation Is different from Skinny Dipping , gymnastics, surfing, wrestling ?

Antis believe that a 15-16 year old can drive a car, change gender, but cannot agree to sex, or that a teenager may be a murderer , but he cannot be a lover. According to their logic, even masturbation with an adult is more difficult and dangerous than driving a car. Antis have introduced so-called "informed consent" merely as a convenient defensive barrier for their prejudices. Do they require "informed consent" for circumcision?They themselves deny timely sex education that would make sex safe and ensure that very “informed consent.

[RoosterDance]

All forms of physical violence, cruelty, torture, pain, and the infliction of suffering or misery on a child—whether sexual or non-sexual in nature—should fall under the category of child rape and warrant the most severe punishments.

Let's not confuse the definition of rape any more than it is already. Rape implies something sexual. Anything non-sexual could fall under the more general category of child abuse. I would consider these all to be on the same level.

there is a case right now of a man in Australia that is accused of over 70 crimes with 8 (or more) children in day care centers

As for this original case. I'd say there's no easy answer. I'll start by mentioning that I'm still strongly against one-size-fits-all regulations like how the age of consent is currently handled. Ideally we should be looking at cases individually And weighing the factors within.

For this one he should most certainly be arrested and reprimanded. This behavior should not be allowed to continue. Him doing this repeatedly establishes a pattern of him willing to do this repeatedly. So it is best to separate him from the opportunity to do so again. And though I'm reluctant to say it, incarceration seems an effective method to do just that. Though on that note, our prison systems could definitely use an overhaul. Something more like Scandinavian prisons would be ideal.

And as a footnote, even something as extreme as this is not something I would put on the same level as murder. It really scares me how little value people put on human life.

What if the kid says “no”? Or doesn’t say anything? [To a handjob or similar.]

For a more mild case like this, I'd put it on the same level as punching someone who didn't want that and treat it accordingly. In my opinion, a verbal reprimand would be enough. Slap a fine on it if you must.

In a case like yours specifically, I'd just let school policy take over. That would likely result in termination and being blacklisted from attaining such a job ever again. That should be punishment enough, though even that I'd think is a bit too much.