What is a peadophile anyway? That in itself is subject to much debate and discussion. Seems like its the new favourite allegation made by women who don't like the idea of men having anything to do with women younger than themselves..

Paedophilia is a mental illness. Most people seem to forget that.

It is rare. Very rare.

Whilst some activities of the mentally ill may be criminal in nature, even quite sane people commit crimes. The consequences have to be dealt with and perpertrators discouraged and punished.

Whilst our society recognises ans uses mental illness as an excuse for women criminals, it seems to ignore the illness where men are afflicted.

The hysteria generated by 'child sexual assault' ignores another category of mental illness, described in the DSM. Factitious Disorders. To my jaundiced old eye, this is a category that has exploded in its incidence over the past 30 years or so.

I would say (without the requisit statistical back-up) that far more incidents of 'deliberate and fanciful lying' occur than sexual assaults on children. It is far more than can be explained by the 'fanciful' aspect alone.

Is being a homosexual a mental illness too? Seems they recently decided it was NOT a mental illness... But never mind, they can always invent new ones to fill the gaps left when the previous sicko's have become mainstream and accepted..

I think everything to do with sex is a mental illness if we want to look at it that way!

Quote from felixblue

Is being a homosexual a mental illness too? Seems they recently decided it was NOT a mental illness...


I do not see homosexuality as a mental illness by any reasoned definition; it is a genetic issue and commonly found in most animals, although in very small proportion. It cannot be seen as a typifier. But it can be conflated by several other mental illness issues, just as being heterosexual can.

I could argue that most human behaviour is 'usual' in some degree, but some are sufficiently causing of 'dis-ease' to be classifyable as illness.

But never mind, they can always invent new ones to fill the gaps left when the previous sicko's have become mainstream and accepted..

I think everything to do with sex is a mental illness if we want to look at it that way!

Quote from felixblue

Is being a homosexual a mental illness too? Seems they recently decided it was NOT a mental illness... But never mind, they can always invent new ones to fill the gaps left when the previous sicko's have become mainstream and accepted..

I think everything to do with sex is a mental illness if we want to look at it that way!

I a agree with Felix 100% on this. Psychiatry is a psuedo-science. Laws quite often define mental illness - until 1969/1970, in the USA, women who had sexual fantasies were regarded as ill (see Nancy Friday "My secret garden"). Freud regarded sexual fantises - by either sex as a sign one needs treatment.

Thus psychiatry is a way mondern society controls is members. In many societies - eg Uzbekistan, Keyan many things we regarded as "illnesses" in the west are regarded as gifts - eg Uzbekistan for thousands of years did not have a written culture - it was a Druid type of culture based on Shamans who travelled around telling stories, when they entered a trance.

If all psychiatrists we deported to siberia and left to rot, the world would be a far better place. See Citizens Commission on Human Rights, CCHR: Watch Hard-Hitting Documentaries & Videos From CCHR.

And let us not forget how many childen - NAY - BOYS! are disgnosed with ADHD and other psycho-babble "illnesses".

Sorry, Percy, time to re-educate you. Citizens Commission on Human Rights, CCHR: Watch Hard-Hitting Documentaries & Videos From CCHR.

Psychiattry is not based on any actual science. In cancer you can PROVE xyz or happening - this is not possible with psychiatry - and for this reason even in court its opinions are questioned

I don’t think it will be any surprise to those who have read my private term, the great ignorami, to know I also have minimal credibility for the formal subjects which presuming knowledge of the human mind and its function. Worst still, some of the most prominent constituents of the great ignorami such as psychology, psychiatry and sociology not only do great harm to the individual and society, by being formalised and sanctioned as valid, they sustain vast numbers of so called professionals in a false employment racket. These subjects are as valid as reading tea leaves or palms to predict people’s fate – pure ignorami.

They are the 21^st centaury’s Weston world’s equivalent of shamanism and witch doctorey, and I have about the same regard for them as that.

However, I don’t see the great ignorami as something with clear and set boundaries, but relate to it more as a function of a sliding scale continuum of credibility. For example, psychology is pure bunk to me, whilst psychiatry has some standing in knowledge for the study of the effects of drugs on brain function; whilst neurology and neuroscience are respectful to me as serious studies of knowledge.

In the same way sociology is not rational or knowledge in any form I can respect, it just makes it up as they go along to pander to prevailing prejudices and cultural fashions of popular ignorance, whilst anthropology is something I have more respect for as a rational knowledge based science.



On a vain note, I am quite happy for others to use the term ignorami if they choose (would like it actually), but would like to point out that for me it has its own definition. It is not a plural of ignorant or ignoramus, it is just ignorami as a collective concept of various subjects which I pronounce ignoram-aye, not ignoram-ee.

A person can be ignorami, or do ignorami, by promoting its constituent false subjects in personal belief, or more harmfully, officially practice them on the vulnerable public. An individual subject can be ignorami, and a collection of them too. But the great ignorami is the whole stinking lot of it in totality. Clearly, feminism is very deep within the great ignorami.

In essence, continuing with my vain streak, the great ignorami, is an insult to rationality and knowledge, the greatest threat to human progress and our potential advancement.



No I have not had a spliff today.

So back to my original question what percentage of accusations are false?

On a side note, so far I am surpised and dissapointed that on one has given me any figures - but I expect that my dissapointment soon will be overturned (:

Power of lies. Real fathers for justice. - YouTube


Do you think occurrences like this are allowed to be gathered as statistics by our feminist civil service? It’s like asking what proportion of statements by mothers in family courts are proven as false. The accused man in the video would not have been a statistic of false paedophilia because he wasn’t prosecuted in a criminal court for peiodiphila; it was the family courts, like so many countless other false paedophilia accusations. The feminists want to promote the view that all men are potential paedophiles; it is against their policy to allow statistics which show that to be unbalanced.

Sure you could possibly find how many people charged with paedophilia were not proven guilty, but what proportion accused by some official, or indeed charged and then the charges dropped before it got to court would there be.

The feminist public services do everything to keep things secret, hidden and vastly misrepresented.

It is the nature of the great ignorami to loath knowledge and rationality.

I am trying to get answers because wiki says only 10% of men are innocent. We need hard facts/data to counter the wiki entry. If some poor idiot reads the wiki post and is facing a trail, then he obivioulsy feels that he has no chance of being proved innocent.

And therefroe lynching of such men is also justified - as in 90% of cases they are "guilty"

Richard, with respect Sir, it is very easy to dismiss an entire subject discipline when one has no idea what one is talking about.

I have just spent a little time reviewing my DSM and its entry at 302.20

It looks quite reasoned and descriptive to me.

I look to my own 25 years experience and practical knowledge of the psychology field (I do not speak for psychiatry) and can discriminate the difference between the wild assumptions of 18th century pioneers along with 20/21st C charlatans on the one hand and considered professionals on the other.

I might remind you that several of the most prominent members of the MRM are psychologists. Angry Harry, Bernard Chapin, Carey Roberts, Paul Elam to name the most recent chaps. Your dismissal of the profession that such men as these has chosen to study and persue is to call their sense into question.

Illness and disease come in two major modes, Organic and non-organic. Either can cause a person to suffer disruption to their lives and normality. That is what dis-ease is about. Indeed, some cause dis-ease in others. Some mental illnesses can be 'caught' through environmental activation of some suceptibility. Causes of many mental - and physical - illnesses are still quite unknown, but people make educated speculations. I would agree that some are far better than others.

In answer to your question, - and what Wiki says, is neither here nor there - considerably fewer than 1% of the population are suffering from paedophilia, at best guess. But of course 100% of the paedophiles are suffering from it. How many and what proportion are identified as such is subject to the same diagnostic opportunity as for any other illness. 'Accused' legally, is a totally different matter. That is dependant upon forensic 'proofs'.

There are more psychopaths in the population.

(And considerably more smart-arses. )

Quote from Percy

Richard, with respect Sir, it is very easy to dismiss an entire subject discipline when one has no idea what one is talking about.

I have just spent a little time reviewing my DSM and its entry at 302.20

It looks quite reasoned and descriptive to me.

As you know I respect you Percy - but I also like a good debate.

It might good quite descrptive - but the Nazi order to invade France, Poland, Russia, or for the "final solution" were also quite descriptive also. Indeed, feminists definitions are also quite descriptive but it does not make them right.

In terms of psychiarty, almost no progress has been made in a thousand years - only the techniques have changed. The basic method is to "shock" someone to "conform" to to wake them up to "this is our reality". In medevil period, it incuded near drowning, or fire. In early 20c it involved insulin and electric shocks.

Psychiatry is an evil discpline with only victims to show. How many kids are drugged needeless up? Brtain recently closed almost all its psychiaetic hospitals - 150,000 people passed through them since 1945 - to put that in scale the UK has a prsion population of 80,000.

Psychology is partly respectable, but psychiarty is based on chemicals and torture dressed up as medicine. Eyseck proved how people are not cured by psychiarty. And let us not forget that famous experiment in the 1970s when non sick people were sent to psychiartic hopsitals complaining of a "ringing " in their ears. They were all hospitalised and disagnosed with sczophrenia!!!! (I am sure you know the study I have in mind, or else I will find it for you).

Psychiarty is political defined, it is not neutral, but reflects the values of a society. As flexibleu said even gays were labelled as sixck, but once they got politcal power they were no longer sick due to the stroke of a pen. Psychiatry ha!

Ah, and FYI 80% of German psychiartists signed up to be members of the nazi party - they were not forced, they signed up.

Psychiarty is an industry of death and I am shocked that you have anything to do with it.

Yes, Richard, I know. I know. (Best Sybil Fawlty voice).

More people die in hospital than in any other institution. (Often from marriage poisoning)

Once upon a time, only a short while ago (when you are as old and knackered as me), physicians were of the view that veins and arteries contained air, leeches were God's gift to the sick, and masturbation was a jolly good treatment for hysteria.

But professional folk do often get some wisdom and far sounder techniques over time.

Roll on the Tri-corder gizmo that 'Bones' uses on Star Trek.

Well in Percy’s post he did say he does not speak for psychiatry, but psychology, and in all fairness I am please he did not respond to my attack of subjects he might have respect for, as disrespect to him personally, which most certainly it isn’t.

These great ignorami subjects are pure tosh from details like the ones you have stated in your post, but also the obvious glaring omissions of states of mind that are unacceptable.

How comes there are no entries in DSM or ICD for conditions that MRA’s are too familiar with like the very feminine entitlement complex. Or the condition in so many of both genders to candour to the femi-pass, (what MRA’s often refer to as pussy pass). When highly important official judgments are made affecting the most precious aspects of a person’s life, people seem consumed by the madness of femi-pass. Yet the ignorami industry just sanctions such human destruction – like Nazi psycho/psychiatrists.

Total hogwash ignorami. I don’t even think psychopathy should be regarded as a disorder, it’s a natural state for some human minds without which many of our advancements may not have happened. They’re not mentally ill or dysfunctional, they’re natural humans I believe – just evil ones! No, but the great ignorami just have to wrap it up in ignorami mysticism and make a false employment racket that they get lots of money and BS status from.

I mean for goodness sake, who are they to define what an illness is when they only have contemporary social norms to base their definitions of what mentally healthy is. Throughout time and culture they chop and change their regard of illness and disorders by the weight of cultural fissions.

With our current feminist intoxication I’ll next be expecting the term MRA to appear in DSM/ICD as an illness/disorder, instead of entitlement complex. I mean if this subject had any integrity, how comes it is so extensively used to promote feminist values – just like it did for Nazism. Total ignorami.

You’ve read the following before, so I’ll just past it in for others.
Post 17 from: If suicide is so painless............


1- Before people knew better, they thought astrological ideas were the explanation to what we know of as astronomy. Their invalid astrology was wholeheartedly given credence and respect as knowledge, but bluntly, it was just zany and imaginatively theatrical bullshit. I look at astrology as an invalid subject, as I believe psychology is today.

2- As the scientifically valid subject of chemistry was forming its infancy, there were alternative fiction's that conceptually overlapped with it. Invalid subjects such as alchemy or even witch craft were respected and believed as knowledge.

Valid subjects prove themselves. Just take as little as 50 years to see the valid benefits of chemistry compared to the benefits of psychology. If it was a valid subject the mental and emotional well-being of people would be noticeably improved over the societies of 50 years ago. Well I like many feel that mental and emotional well-being have generally deteriorated since that time. Now consider the unimaginably numerous benefits to people from the application of chemistry in that time.

To me, psychology like astrology and alchemy, or even reading tea leaves for that matter, is fiction.
The only difference is that psychology is currently accepted as valid whilst the others are rejected as untrue. Invalid subjects can only be seen as such in the past whilst in contemporary ones, their falsehood is culturally invisible.

Contemporary but invalid subjects like psychology are self sustaining and even expanding when political, social and economic reasons sustain them. Politically and socially psychology supports feminism from what I can see, and whether you like it or not, feminism is the popularlist way of our culture. Economically; well, I've used the term 'employment racket' on previous posts to project my view of so much of our public institutions and academia. Just think of the legions of people who falsify a living through ideas, which I believe have misplaced public support, one day may look like reading tea leaves.And as ever Percy, no personal slur or criticism is intended, I just disagree with your view about the matter and welcome the grace you have shown.




I just missed your post while posting mine Percy. I do accept that there are many good people professionally involved with the great ignorami, but to me it’s like rational scientifically minded people involved with astrology before astronomy was developed.

Quote from Percy

and masturbation was a jolly good treatment for hysteria.

Actually I think this one is true, but you’d have to know the insanity that is felixblue to comprehend that.

Quote from Percy

Paedophilia is a mental illness. Most people seem to forget that.

It is rare. Very rare.

Whilst some activities of the mentally ill may be criminal in nature, even quite sane people commit crimes. The consequences have to be dealt with and perpertrators discouraged and punished.


.

It is rare. Very rare.

seems it is ubiqutous Percy with the regularity of busts of international pedo rings; and who have most access to little children ! men or wimyn

we are all aware of wimyn's penchant for indulging dar selves ! all about choice