|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
 Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2010 8:34 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| recessiontime wrote: |
let's just use your numbers then and add some 2009 demographics.
| Quote: |
US Population
307,212,123 (July 2009 est.)
Age structure
0-14 years: 20.2% (male 31,639,127/female 30,305,704)
15-64 years: 67% (male 102,665,043/female 103,129,321)
65 years and over: 12.8% (male 16,901,232/female 22,571,696) (2009 est.)
http://www.indexmundi.com/united_states/demographics_profile.html |
so 26% of 119.56 million males (above 15) is still ~31million pedophiles
So we just put 1 pedo in jail. There are still ~31 million American males to potential pedophiles. Even if you don't account for age groups of 15~18 you probably would still have something like 25million people that are aroused by pedophilic stimuli.
Concerning  |
OK, now if we estimate it cost $2 million to put this guy away, times 25 million pedophiles = $50 Trillion.  Think if all the poor, starving banksters who could use that money. But if it protects just one imaginary girl from getting raped, it is worth it, right?  |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Captain Corea
Joined: 28 Feb 2005
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 06, 2010 12:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| And that estimate comes from? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
recessiontime
Joined: 21 Jun 2010
Location: Got avatar privileges nyahahaha
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 06, 2010 3:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Captain Corea wrote: |
| And that estimate comes from? |
I guesstimated the number of pedophiles based on his stats and 2009 population demographics which I googled. It's not an accurate number but it gives you a rough idea.
26% of adult men getting turned on by children -This is something you have to think about when talking about pedophilia. It's also you want to think about if you ever want to risk leaving your children with strangers that are adult men... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Leon
Joined: 31 May 2010
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 06, 2010 6:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| recessiontime wrote: |
| Captain Corea wrote: |
| And that estimate comes from? |
I guesstimated the number of pedophiles based on his stats and 2009 population demographics which I googled. It's not an accurate number but it gives you a rough idea.
26% of adult men getting turned on by children -This is something you have to think about when talking about pedophilia. It's also you want to think about if you ever want to risk leaving your children with strangers that are adult men... |
That stat verges on the meaningless. If you introduce a sexual stimulus, many people are going to be turned on, especially if it is taboo. It's only meaningful if they actively seek it out, which isn't 26% of men. Also, like I mentioned to Bacasper on an earlier thread, anyone who willingly views child pornography, for science or not, is probably more likely to be a pedophile. Worthless statistics. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 06, 2010 7:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Captain Corea wrote: |
| And that estimate comes from? |
The $2 million is just a guesstimate on my part, so why don't you take a stab at it. How much do you think was the total cost to the four police agencies involved to pursue this case over four and a half months? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Captain Corea
Joined: 28 Feb 2005
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 06, 2010 5:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bacasper wrote: |
| Captain Corea wrote: |
| And that estimate comes from? |
The $2 million is just a guesstimate on my part, so why don't you take a stab at it. How much do you think was the total cost to the four police agencies involved to pursue this case over four and a half months? |
Much different than yours. 4 police agencies over 4 1/2 months did not only work on this case. You'd have to know the number of man-hours logged on this specific case.
If you have 4 officers chatting on the 'net. And for 30 minutes each day one of them chats with this guy, do you include the whole budget of the dept in this case, or do you break it down per hour/minute?
$2 million is only a guess. As is your guess of entrapment.
I'm fine with guesses, but just keep it clear that it's only a guess.
You guess that this case would cost a lot.
You guess that the guy was entrapped. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
recessiontime
Joined: 21 Jun 2010
Location: Got avatar privileges nyahahaha
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 06, 2010 6:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Leon wrote: |
| recessiontime wrote: |
| Captain Corea wrote: |
| And that estimate comes from? |
I guesstimated the number of pedophiles based on his stats and 2009 population demographics which I googled. It's not an accurate number but it gives you a rough idea.
26% of adult men getting turned on by children -This is something you have to think about when talking about pedophilia. It's also you want to think about if you ever want to risk leaving your children with strangers that are adult men... |
That stat verges on the meaningless. If you introduce a sexual stimulus, many people are going to be turned on, especially if it is taboo. It's only meaningful if they actively seek it out, which isn't 26% of men. Also, like I mentioned to Bacasper on an earlier thread, anyone who willingly views child pornography, for science or not, is probably more likely to be a pedophile. Worthless statistics. |
According to the DSMIV, anyone that have pedophilic thoughts are considered pedophiles. By this very definition those 26% don't have to actively seek anything. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Leon
Joined: 31 May 2010
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 06, 2010 6:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| recessiontime wrote: |
| Leon wrote: |
| recessiontime wrote: |
| Captain Corea wrote: |
| And that estimate comes from? |
I guesstimated the number of pedophiles based on his stats and 2009 population demographics which I googled. It's not an accurate number but it gives you a rough idea.
26% of adult men getting turned on by children -This is something you have to think about when talking about pedophilia. It's also you want to think about if you ever want to risk leaving your children with strangers that are adult men... |
That stat verges on the meaningless. If you introduce a sexual stimulus, many people are going to be turned on, especially if it is taboo. It's only meaningful if they actively seek it out, which isn't 26% of men. Also, like I mentioned to Bacasper on an earlier thread, anyone who willingly views child pornography, for science or not, is probably more likely to be a pedophile. Worthless statistics. |
According to the DSMIV, anyone that have pedophilic thoughts are considered pedophiles. By this very definition those 26% don't have to actively seek anything. |
Wrong. Those men didn't necessarily have those thoughts before, or after, the videos. Also the selection bias for a study like the one Bacasper would be very high. Most people would flat out refuse to watch child pornography, study or not. 26% is a highly dubious number, but if you want to believe it's a fairly normal thing then, well you'll believe most anything. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
recessiontime
Joined: 21 Jun 2010
Location: Got avatar privileges nyahahaha
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 06, 2010 7:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| who said it was pornography. If you show pictures of kids and you get a rise out of it, that's a pedophilic thought. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Leon
Joined: 31 May 2010
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 06, 2010 7:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| recessiontime wrote: |
| who said it was pornography. If you show pictures of kids and you get a rise out of it, that's a pedophilic thought. |
In the study it was pornography, according to what little I know about it from Bacaspers posts. Wouldn't be much of a study if it wasn't, I mean I'm into women but do not get aroused every time I see a picture of one. I doubt that even pedophiles get turned on by every picture of every kid they see. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 07, 2010 7:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| recessiontime wrote: |
| Leon wrote: |
| recessiontime wrote: |
| Captain Corea wrote: |
| And that estimate comes from? |
I guesstimated the number of pedophiles based on his stats and 2009 population demographics which I googled. It's not an accurate number but it gives you a rough idea.
26% of adult men getting turned on by children -This is something you have to think about when talking about pedophilia. It's also you want to think about if you ever want to risk leaving your children with strangers that are adult men... |
That stat verges on the meaningless. If you introduce a sexual stimulus, many people are going to be turned on, especially if it is taboo. It's only meaningful if they actively seek it out, which isn't 26% of men. Also, like I mentioned to Bacasper on an earlier thread, anyone who willingly views child pornography, for science or not, is probably more likely to be a pedophile. Worthless statistics. |
According to the DSMIV, anyone that have pedophilic thoughts are considered pedophiles. By this very definition those 26% don't have to actively seek anything. |
They are diagnosable for them only if they have persisted longer than six months, and are distressed by them (i.e. not "ego-syntonic").
| Leon wrote: |
| Wrong. Those men didn't necessarily have those thoughts before, or after, the videos. Also the selection bias for a study like the one Bacasper would be very high. Most people would flat out refuse to watch child pornography, study or not. 26% is a highly dubious number, but if you want to believe it's a fairly normal thing then, well you'll believe most anything. |
The men were recruited without being told of the nature of the stimuli, and were also shown stimuli involving adult females. They were shown slides of full frontal nudes of both prepubescent and adult females and listened to audiotapes of both coercive and non-coercive sex in both groups, but no visual child pornography per se. Other studies have found rates from 12% to 32%. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Leon
Joined: 31 May 2010
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 07, 2010 7:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bacasper wrote: |
| recessiontime wrote: |
| Leon wrote: |
| recessiontime wrote: |
| Captain Corea wrote: |
| And that estimate comes from? |
I guesstimated the number of pedophiles based on his stats and 2009 population demographics which I googled. It's not an accurate number but it gives you a rough idea.
26% of adult men getting turned on by children -This is something you have to think about when talking about pedophilia. It's also you want to think about if you ever want to risk leaving your children with strangers that are adult men... |
That stat verges on the meaningless. If you introduce a sexual stimulus, many people are going to be turned on, especially if it is taboo. It's only meaningful if they actively seek it out, which isn't 26% of men. Also, like I mentioned to Bacasper on an earlier thread, anyone who willingly views child pornography, for science or not, is probably more likely to be a pedophile. Worthless statistics. |
According to the DSMIV, anyone that have pedophilic thoughts are considered pedophiles. By this very definition those 26% don't have to actively seek anything. |
They are diagnosable for them only if they have persisted longer than six months, and are distressed by them (i.e. not "ego-syntonic").
| Leon wrote: |
| Wrong. Those men didn't necessarily have those thoughts before, or after, the videos. Also the selection bias for a study like the one Bacasper would be very high. Most people would flat out refuse to watch child pornography, study or not. 26% is a highly dubious number, but if you want to believe it's a fairly normal thing then, well you'll believe most anything. |
The men were recruited without being told of the nature of the stimuli, and were also shown stimuli involving adult females. They were shown slides of full frontal nudes of both prepubescent and adult females and listened to audiotapes of both coercive and non-coercive sex in both groups, but no visual child pornography per se. Other studies have found rates from 12% to 32%. |
You mean that the men were shown naked children without expecting it? That would be the best way to get rid of selection bias, but would also be unethical. I would think 12% might be a more reasonable number, but the thought itself, while disturbing in its own right, isn't a crime. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 07, 2010 8:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Leon wrote: |
| bacasper wrote: |
| The men were recruited without being told of the nature of the stimuli, and were also shown stimuli involving adult females. They were shown slides of full frontal nudes of both prepubescent and adult females and listened to audiotapes of both coercive and non-coercive sex in both groups, but no visual child pornography per se. Other studies have found rates from 12% to 32%. |
You mean that the men were shown naked children without expecting it? That would be the best way to get rid of selection bias, but would also be unethical. I would think 12% might be a more reasonable number, but the thought itself, while disturbing in its own right, isn't a crime. |
Let's be sure we understand your position: the mere viewing of a non-pornographic nude photo of a child is unethical? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Leon
Joined: 31 May 2010
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 07, 2010 9:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bacasper wrote: |
| Leon wrote: |
| bacasper wrote: |
| The men were recruited without being told of the nature of the stimuli, and were also shown stimuli involving adult females. They were shown slides of full frontal nudes of both prepubescent and adult females and listened to audiotapes of both coercive and non-coercive sex in both groups, but no visual child pornography per se. Other studies have found rates from 12% to 32%. |
You mean that the men were shown naked children without expecting it? That would be the best way to get rid of selection bias, but would also be unethical. I would think 12% might be a more reasonable number, but the thought itself, while disturbing in its own right, isn't a crime. |
Let's be sure we understand your position: the mere viewing of a non-pornographic nude photo of a child is unethical? |
No. But given the nature of the issue it would possibly be unethical to show it people, especially in a study involving sexual arousal, with out first getting their permission. Also how the study got audio tapes of coercive and non-coercive sex with children is questionable, as is playing it for participants before having their consent. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Captain Corea
Joined: 28 Feb 2005
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 07, 2010 4:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I also question the material.
If, for example, they showed a picture of a 16 year old dressed up/edited to look much older, it may affect how people perceive the picture/subject.
Likewise, if they showed a picture of a 22 year old that was specifically chosen for their unnaturally young looks, then that could also warp perceptions.
We've all seen how advertisers play these games... and I'd personally hate to be judged on my ability to figure out their professional strategy.
For me, it's clear. I know where my lines are, and I'm very comfortable with them. But if someone was to purposely try to mess with those lines, I'm not sure how the results would read. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
