If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Anthems and Protests ---
While we certainly understand the frustration by fans on all sides of the discussion, we have decided to keep the Broncos Country message boards separate from politics. Recent events have brought the NFL to the forefront of political debates, but due to the highly emotional and passionate discussion it tends to involve, we think it’s best to continue to keep politics and this forum separate. Yes, the forum is meant for discussion, but we’d like to keep that discussion to football as much as possible.
With everything going on in our country, it would be nice to keep our complaints and cheers purely related to football here. If you feel passionately, there are plenty of other outlets available to you to express your opinions. We know this isn’t the most popular decision, but we ask that you respect it.
Thank you for understanding.
--Broncos Country Message Board Staff
Besides, if rape had anything at all to do with libido, we wouldn't have prostitution, would we?
I guess you didn't read the 'freudian' paragraph, huh?
If a person is horny; they hire hookers. Rape is not about sex. For a rapist, sex is a means to power and control, domination and humiliation - and really, truly, not much else.
I agree, to a point.
If a person just wants to dominate by power, control and humiliation, then why pick sex? I'm sure there's plenty of other things the deviant could do.
Not really. I mean in "most" cases. At least that's what the experts have to say. To some extent it might be that way - but really that's more of what sexual deviance such as S&M is all about - where a person is sexually dominated and humiliated, but is a willing participant in the act.
I dunno. I'm not a rapist, and I doubt anyone is going to confess on these boards and grant us insight into a rapist's mind. The experts tend to believe it's really not much of an impact though, and that sexual arousal has little if anything to do with rape in most cases.
But yeah.. I dunno. It doesn't make sense to me either really - then again if it did, I'd be a little worried.
Rape is a crime that INVOLVES sex, as a means to fulfilling other motives.
I see what you're saying and I think maybe we're arriving at the same conclusion from different angles. This statement pretty much sums up my ideas about rape.
I just don't understand how a rapist could commit a sexual crime without any desire to engage in the act. Surely, there has to be some sexual arousal involved?
I think it's more accurate to say rape is about both power and sex. Using power to force sex with someone else. If a rapist wasn't horny enough to rape would he rape in the first place?
Yeah. He sure would.
Statistically, most rapists don't orgasm during a rape to begin with. Clearly it's not a sexual gratification thing. Second, if a person was truly after sexual gratification, a willing partner would be more capable of producing the desired result than a non-compliant one, no? Even if it was a hooker, they'd be more likely to produce the desired affect than an unwilling participant.
Besides, if rape had anything at all to do with libido, we wouldn't have prostitution, would we?
This web search prduced a number of articles for me about rape. Some are from individual web sites that ... I dunno. Don't really need to be looked at. But some are from rape crisis centers and highly regarded psychological institutions as well. Almost universally, they all maintain that rape is a crime of power, not sexual desire or gratification.
If a person is horny; they hire hookers. Rape is not about sex. For a rapist, sex is a means to power and control, domination and humiliation - and really, truly, not much else.
Prostitution is a crime ABOUT sex. Rape is a crime that INVOLVES sex, as a means to fulfilling other motives.
Sexual assault is. Rape is a crime about power. Not sex.
If people are horny, they go hire prostitutes. Rape is not about sex.
I think it's more accurate to say rape is about both power and sex. Using power to force sex with someone else. If a rapist wasn't horny enough to rape would he rape in the first place?
Lawers and lawsuits and such I guess should be discussed somewhere else but let me just say this - not every lawyer is out there to screw people - almost every lawyer I have had close contact with is a decent hard working individual doing nothing more than earning a living like the rest of us - the press just loves to jump all over the "bad" in any profession -
There def. needs to be something done but its no worse than every other screwed up aspect of this society - something that started off as a great thing, got screwed up be people who have no morals but it doesnt mean that everyone is like that -
And I do see both sides to the orig. point of this thread - sex crimes are a tough one cause a 18 yrd old can have sex with a 15 yr old and be convicted of a sex crime and have to register as a sex offender for the rest of his life - and in all actualality, thats not really fair - when you look up sex offenders you really dont know the true nature of their crime - and IMO it makes a big difference - but if he is truly a child molester - I wouldnt want him in my neighborhood, cause I honestly dont believe you can be completely reformed
Isnt or didnt Kevin Bacon recently do a movie about this - where he playe a child molester who did his time then moves close to a school and struggled with the temptation - IDK - i cant remember I just saw a small little piece about it on some movie review show
I've read where they consider sexual deviancy is actually in the genes, unlike murderers, robbers, etc.
Its not something that they do because of their surrounding elements; they'll do it because it drives them. It's actually, OK.
Of course, there's also other ideas out there, as well......
Freud's Psychodynamic Theory suggests that the three constructs of the psyche (id, ego, and superego) are in constant turmoil over energy. Some theorists suggest that sexual offenders have very weak superegos (morals) and very powerful ids (sexual impulses, libido ).
Cognitive Behavioral Theory suggests that irrational beliefs and cognitive distortions help to initiate sexual deviancy. Soon after the offender becomes conditioned to negative sexual stimuli, with "orgasm" being the reinforcer. These constructs combined (cognitive/behavioral) create persistent patterns on how the offender behaves as well as views the world. The secrecy, among other constructs, soon becomes part of the conditioned response and perpetuates the deviancy. The Learning Theory is also a significant component of this approach. Children who are sexually abused learn sex through inappropriate means, and if exposed enough, children may internalize this learned behavior. Sex offenders do appear to view the world differently than "normal" men--they perceive women, children, sex, and arousal qualitatively different. When this occurs after a long period of time, the offender begins to behave accordingly. Many times the sexual offender suffers from chronic low grade depression, very low self esteem, has been ridiculed his entire life, and so forth. These traits tend to distort the offenders view of the world, and, for the molester, he may find comfort and acceptance in the children he so desires. Immaturity is a trademark of the child molester. This appears to occur due to the fact that he has not advanced emotionally since his tormented adolescent years.
Evolutionary Theory posits that males in general have learned throughout time to become more aggressive and dominant towards women in particular. This would be due to successful reproduction and passing on the male's genetic material. The more aggressive males continued to pass on those genes while at the same time learning from prior generations. Prehistoric women were monogamous by nature--they needed men to assist them during and after childbirth. Without the assistance of man, the mortality rate for women and children would be substantially reduced. The more sexually aggressive males mated much more frequently than passive males, and therefore those genes kept evolving. Today, society becomes outraged when we compare human beings to animals. "We have advanced so much" "But our brains are so much more complex". The truth reveals that the human sexual drive and behavior is very similar to that of other mammals. Though our brains have advanced throughout time, our inherent drive to reproduce has not. This theory may partially account for rape, but fails to address child molestation. A strong indicator of this theory is that most sexual crimes are committed by males.
Bio-medical model suggests that sexual offenders produce more testosterone than non-offenders, and is similar to the evolutionary theory. New research suggests that males with longer ring fingers than index fingers may have more testosterone in the body. I have found that the offenders I have worked with do, in general, have longer ring fingers than the substance abuse clients I have treated with no known history of sexual deviancy The production of testosterone is in the testes, thereby removing the testes reduces or eliminates testosterone (either surgically or chemically). There are numerous studies suggesting significant reductions in recidivism rates in those who have been castrated.
Learning Theory would suggest that an offender has somehow learned the sexual deviancy from his or her environment. This theory also incorporates "modeling". This would suggest that the offender learned the behavior from watching someone else behave in a similar fashion, or even by their own sexual abuse. Studies have suggested that anywhere from 30% to 80% of offenders have been sexually abused themselves in the past, and this information may offer credible evidence to support this theory. There are many offenders, however, that report that they have never been sexually abused, and never witnessed sexual abuse in the past. Many offenders do appear to be continually learning and advancing in their sexual deviancy. They learn how to obtain victims more effectively; learn how far they can go; learn what things arouse them more; learn how to avoid or escape detection.
There are a number of "sub-theories" which may include the dynamics of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, Attachment Theory, and so forth. For many of the clients I see (both adolescents and adult sexual offenders), many appear to share the same symptomology: low self esteem, poor self perception, depression, isolation from same age peers, difficulty achieving and maintaining intimate relationships, and their "comfort zone" appears to be limited to their victimology characteristics.
A sex offender was caught, and then served his time. When he got out he registered in compliance with the law.
At some stage he bought a house. Now he is being sued for moving into the neighborhood, which a realtor claims caused a drop in the housing market in that area.
The questions I'd like to raise are, if you've done your time, haven't you paid your debt to society?
If we expect the guy to live a normal life, how come we don't allow him to live a normal life?
If we're trying to punish him forever, why not just keep him in prison forever?
If this can happen to someone because of a crime like this, why not murder, burglary, robbery, assault and other violent crimes?
Getting back to the original topic...
It's not about punishing the offender as protecting the innocent from what offender is capable of doing. Even with current (and arguabley ineffectual) registration a convicted sex offender can still live a relatively normal life if he/she so chooses. Unfortunately, many stats show that sex offenders show one of the worst recidivism rates.
This is just one of the consequences of being convicted of the crime. Just like the same sex offender can no longer vote which is part of "normal" life.
What is with you Yanks and suing everyone? I mean, it's unbelievable. Like the cookie thing you posted earlier, you'd get laughed out of court up here if you tried that. You can't sue for "Mental Anguish" in canuckia. Not calling down you guys, but I am genuinely confused.
Not to be contentious, I am so enjoying peace and tranquility lately, but I seem to remember it different as far as Edwards legal history.
And right off the bat, no, I am not going to look it up or prove my point. I am asserting here what was discussed ad nauseum before.
Of course it was Insurance Companies that Edwards sued.
(Please note I did not call him an ambulance chaser)
Insurance companies have the deep pockets to pay, but pass on the cost to all of their clients (us), and their profit margin over time is not affected. Cost of coverage increases dramaticly, though, hurting the clients (us). Additionaly, the cost of malpractice insurance for ob/gyn's as a result of the case went through the roof. That cost is passed on to the client (us). Now fewer students become OB/GYN's due to the onerous malpractice insurance required to practice. (The same is true across the board in the case of Drs specialising anymore, there are fewer and fewer specialists emerging from Med school in all fields. It is much cheaper and easier to simply be a General Practioner)
Edwards big, huge case involved ob/gyn's, and he succesfully swayed a jury to make a huge award. His "evidence" was shortly thereafter proved to be "Junk Science" and innacurate and simply not true. I believe this assertion is widely accepted as accurate and true. Sadly, the proof after the fact had no bearing on the multi, multi, mega amount awarded by the jury that day. And who got hurt? Just a big, mean insurance company. But like I said, their profit margin did not waver over the long run, they pass the cost on to their clients(us) and the Dr.s.
And the poor unfortunate "victims" Edwards represented? After Edwards took the lion's share off of the top, the poor unfortunate "victims" actually received relatively small amounts once the small piece of the pie allotted for them was divided up between them.
This type of lawsuit goes on year after year, the lawyers being the big winners. Their clients get a relatively small amount, and the "evil" corporations simply pass the cost on to the consumers. Tort reform is needed. You can bet your bottom dollar 2 lawyers in charge would not have changed a damn thing!
I look for significant legeslation to cap awards, make reasonable the system, and create safeguards against frivolous lawsuits.
Just like that woman in Durango, who jumped on the opportunity to sue the 2 teenage girls who dropped off homemade cookies on her doorstep in an act of kindness, and the lame brained judge who backed her, there needs to be rules and guidlines enacted to make the system reasonable.
Put politics aside. Look at the big picture. Reform is needed. These out of hand huge awards are one of the major reasons health care has increased so dramaticly in recent years.
Leave a comment: