the greater evil

So long as you've not been living on the moon all your life you'll have seen numerous newspaper / tv stories relating to paedophiles doing whatever they've done to children of varying ages. The condemnation of such people seems so thoroughly total and absolute- and probably rightly so ( I say "probably" as not all cases are the same IMO ) - but consider this for a moment.....for every child abused sexually for money by an adult how many children of an equally young age spend 12 hours a day knee deep in filthy water in gold or copper mines or work in sweat shops 7 days a week, every waking hour and all to earn what? BUTTONS ( as we'd say in Scotland ). All the while multi national companies rake it in on the back of these children.
I simply ask you this. Which is the greater evil? Who does the greater damage long term to the child?
The pedo - who if caught will end up in prison for a number of years, or
the multi national multi million(billion?)aires who if caught will get told not to do it again or else.....well or else they'll get another telling off.

[Michael]

So you're asking us to choose which ABUSE is worse than the other??
I condemn all child abuse.

I think the point he is making is the hypocrisy of societies in general, loud public outrage of any kind of sexual abuse, basically not a peep about other kinds of abuse.

[Bob]

If all the poster was doing was condemning a form of child abuse that doesn't hit the press much or cause much pain to the perpetrator, then I'm all with you, Thaiquila.
But.....but asking which was the greater evil or which causes the most long-term damage, the poster plunged into the stupid
zone. His premise suggests that sexual abuse of minors is "better" or "less evil" than forced child labor or the like. That premise is what the other posters found so objectionable - as do I.

I see your point from a tone point of view, but purely academically, I don't see a problem with a person being intellectually curious about that question. Probably worthy of a thesis paper for somebody. More interesting is probably why society is so fixated on sex.

... is relevant to Thailand because?

... is relevant to Thailand because?
Two words: Sunnee Plaza

[cottmann]

I see your point from a tone point of view, but purely academically, I don't see a problem with a person being intellectually curious about that question. Probably worthy of a thesis paper for somebody. More interesting is probably why society is so fixated on sex.

There is an Utne article on this issue at http://www.utne.com/webwatch/2006_255/news/12150-1.html

The corollary question to Thaiquila's is, surely: why is Christian society so fixated on sex?

It seems to me that all the organizations that exist to "fight" child sexual abuse (usually in countries other than their own and with nicer climates), such as ECPAT, all originate in western and mostly Protestant societies. My own views on liking children are closer to those of WC Fields than that Dutch guy who wants to start a political party given parliamentary representation to pedophiles, but I am somewhat sympathetic to Steve1903's viewpoint. There are as many if not more children physically abused by western multinational corporations in 3rd world countries than there are by western (and other) pedophiles operating in those same countries. I guess stories of tens or hundreds of small kids making handwoven carpets or breaking stones for roads or of Michael Jordan earning millions of dollars endorsing products made with child labor just doesn't sell as many copies of newspapers - or get as many viewers to Oprah - as a story of one man abusing a child in Sunee Plaza.

There is no easy fix for the conditions in much of the third world. Putting pedos away and throwing away the key is pretty easy (and satisfying), though.

Putting pedos away and throwing away the key is pretty easy (and satisfying), though.Not to mention satisfying that most basic requirement, fulfilling the knee-jerk reaction

[cottmann]

There is no easy fix for the conditions in much of the third world. Putting pedos away and throwing away the key is pretty easy (and satisfying), though.

So is not wearing anything made for Nike or companies such as Fruit of the Loom, The Gap, Wal-Mart, J C Penney, Target and Sears Roebuck & Co, rugs made by indentured child workers, and so on. Interestingly, much of the child exploitation by US companies takes place on US soil or territory, e.g., American Samoa and Saipan.

What are you going to wear if you boycott all multinational apparel manufacturers? Are you going to weave your own hair shirt?

Utter crap from Marxists who can't bear to admit that communism was a failure, or (slightly more charitably) naive Westerners who don't believe the rest of the world should share their standard of living

[cottmann]

What are you going to wear if you boycott all multinational apparel manufacturers? Are you going to weave your own hair shirt?

Do what I always do - have my clothing, shoes, etc., custom-made.

Do what I always do - have my clothing, shoes, etc., custom-made.Don't tell us - in Bangkok, where the tailors are paid cheaper wages than in Saville Row?

Custom made? I hope you're kidding. Where do you think the textile materials come from? And who do you think is manning the sewing machines in the tailor's back-alley sweatshop?

[cottmann]

Utter crap from Marxists who can't bear to admit that communism was a failure, or (slightly more charitably) naive Westerners who don't believe the rest of the world should share their standard of living

I was not passing judgment on Utne, merely drawing attention to it.

[cottmann]

Do what I always do - have my clothing, shoes, etc., custom-made.Don't tell us - in Bangkok, where the tailors are paid cheaper wages than in Saville Row?

No, of course not!

[cottmann]

Custom made? I hope you're kidding. Where do you think the textile materials come from? And who do you think is manning the sewing machines in the tailor's back-alley sweatshop?

I know where my materials come from - and I do not patronise back-alley tailors.

cottager has been telling us about the wicked multi-nationals but has not produced any evidence for his assertions. And he's not prepared to share his wealth with the toiling masses of Asia (except via fucking their sons)

And he "knows where his materials come from"...what a fucking laugh.

[cottmann]

cottager has been telling us about the wicked multi-nationals but has not produced any evidence for his assertions. And he's not prepared to share his wealth with the toiling masses of Asia (except via fucking their sons)

When you resort to ad hominem abuse, homintern, it is usually a sign that you have lost either the argument or the plot! Neither is dignified or becoming to the persona you try to present here.

Poor old cottman. The rest of us spend our hols on the beach, while he's busy inspecting textile mills, thread spinning plants, and button factories...all to insure that nimble little fingers never come into contact with his accoutrements. Next summer: a trip to vet the factories where the spinning, weaving, and sewing machines are made...then the steel mills where the parts for the machines are made...then to the coal mines where the fuel to run the steel mills comes from...my, my, a do-gooder's work is never done.

cottager has been telling us about the wicked multi-nationals but has not produced any evidence for his assertions. And he's not prepared to share his wealth with the toiling masses of Asia (except via fucking their sons)

When you resort to ad hominem abuse, homintern, it is usually a sign that you have lost either the argument or the plot! Neither is dignified or becoming to the persona you try to present here.Which bit is the ad hominem abuse?
1 You've been telling us about the wicked multinationals
2 You've produced no evidence for your assertions
3 You're not prepared to share your wealth with the toiling masses of Asia
4 You fuck their sons

Do tell! After all, it's not as if I've described you as an American - now that would be ad hominem abuse. Or are you being precious about the term "cottager"?

Sexual abuse or abuse caused through child slave labour, which is worse? I guess the topic has moved on from this premiss but it is still a valid question all the same. I am not a marxist or a communist and I guess I fit in with most of the westerners view of these things, whilst I am appalled at how children are treated (any abuse is to be condemned), what can I do about the sweatshops of India, Sri Lanka, China etc. Having established that I can do nothing, and expressed how appalled I am, I will then continue to buy the goods produced by these nations because they are cheaper and because I feel I need them.

Some governments will make efforts, even if only token ones, to attack child slavery in their own countries. Recently I saw on the BBC that in an Indian city, several children were rescued from sweatshops. These children had been sold by their parents for as little as 10 pounds sterling to pay off debts. Whilst these children were rescued, it was noted by one aide worker that for the few places they succesfully raided, several hundred more existed. Developing nations, like India, depend solely on the ability to maintain a low waged economy if it is to succeed and fulfil it's potential to become one of the largest and most succesful economies in the world. Most of the children rescued would later be returned to the sweatshops.

Do not fool yourself that YOU are not complicit in the continuance of child slavery around the world. Unless you investigate every purchase you make and unless you are actually working to stop child labour, you, like me, more than likely make purchases that help to continue the existing system. Governments are the only ones who have the ability to stop this trade in children's lives and whilst the governments of developing nations and indeed the governments of western nations are happy to make noises off and do nothing, very little will change for these young lives.

Sexual abuse of youngsters or the abuse caused through child labour and slavery, which is worse, which is more evil? Sexual abuse of young children in the home is such a taboo as to make it extremely difficult to target and react to. The fact that some sexual abuse takes place in 'known' pedo bars makes things easier for authorities and there should be no reason why these kind of places are not targetted. More and more countries are now tackling this seriously, although corruption still prevails which allows these pedo places to exist. Please do not slag me off now as I totally condemn sexual abuse and realise the affect that this has on youngster. I agree two wrongs do not make a right. However, if we are talking about greater evils, taking a wider perspective and considering the numbers involved, you could say that governments compliance in child slave labour is a much greater evil than the actions of one pedo.

I realise I may have offended members of this board, some of whom may be survivors of sexual abuse. My cousins were sexually abused by their father and male friends of their father, I realise the impact on the individual and I in no way condone these actions, I outright condemn them.

Utter crap from Marxists who can't bear to admit that communism was a failure, or (slightly more charitably) naive Westerners who don't believe the rest of the world should share their standard of living
That is pure red baiting. Utne Reader is a great American magazine. It is wrong to pidgeonhole them as Marxist. What they do is publish the best of the alternative press. A really great read. Look at some of their typical topics here:

http://www.utne.com/utne_store/back_issues/

From an article in Utne:

Capitalism has been used to justify callousness, exploitation, even slavery. But among the greed weeds grow flowers of generosity and altruism, proof that capitalism is a human institution that can occasionally respond to our better natures. http://www.utne.com/pub/2006_135/promo/12083-1.html

[cottmann]

cottager has been telling us about the wicked multi-nationals but has not produced any evidence for his assertions. And he's not prepared to share his wealth with the toiling masses of Asia (except via fucking their sons)

When you resort to ad hominem abuse, homintern, it is usually a sign that you have lost either the argument or the plot! Neither is dignified or becoming to the persona you try to present here.Which bit is the ad hominem abuse?
1 You've been telling us about the wicked multinationals
2 You've produced no evidence for your assertions
3 You're not prepared to share your wealth with the toiling masses of Asia
4 You fuck their sons

Do tell! After all, it's not as if I've described you as an American - now that would be ad hominem abuse. Or are you being precious about the term "cottager"?

As I am sure you are aware, homintern, an "ad hominem" argument is one that involves replying to an argument, assertion or statement of position by attacking the person presenting the argument or assertion rather attacking than the argument itself.
That is exactly what you did in your posting.
Had you asked, or even questioned my assertion, I would have provided the evidence, but you chose to attack by ridicule first.
What I do with my wealth - such as it is - is not the issue, and how I chose to spend my money (just as how you chose to spend yours) is not something I am prepared to discuss with you on an open board, as neither are my personal or sexual relationships.
You have called me "cottager" on at least one previous occasion and I reacted then as I reacted now. I ignored it! Descent into namecalling is something I did when I was a child, not something I do now.

[cottmann]

Poor old cottman. The rest of us spend our hols on the beach, while he's busy inspecting textile mills, thread spinning plants, and button factories...all to insure that nimble little fingers never come into contact with his accoutrements. Next summer: a trip to vet the factories where the spinning, weaving, and sewing machines are made...then the steel mills where the parts for the machines are made...then to the coal mines where the fuel to run the steel mills comes from...my, my, a do-gooder's work is never done.

Such acid responses suggest I struck a nerve somewhere, boygeenyus. Conscience troubling you, perhaps?

Who, me? Not on your life.

Well as I started it I suppose I best reply.
Thaiquila was spot on when he said that the main point of the question was hypocrisy. I had just watched a news item showing children working in copper mines 12 hours a day and still earning barely enough to be able to eat and wondered if this is really any better than paedophilia which seems to be considered the most heinous crime of all.

The guy who recently got caught with a 17 year old in Diamond Bar had a camera crew and dozens of police on his case and is facing a prison sentence for being part of an activity which most people have tried out by the time they are 16.
The camera crew at the copper mine came and went after a short interview with two 10 year old kids without any mention of the company or people involved and certainly without any police around. The attitude of "well it doesn't seem fair on these children" is just the polar opposite to the story above it.

Another reason for raising the topic is that I find it too easy to just scream PEDO - LOCK HIM UP - THROW AWAY THE KEY - and all that stuff. Last time I was in Pattaya I was with an 18 year old who told me he had been a bar boy since he was 15. Having seen pictures of him when he was younger I doubt I'd have fancied him at that age so had I met him then I wouldn't have wanted to "off" him. Not because it was against the law or because it was immoral but simply because he wouldn't have turned me on. How much harder must it be to resist that type of temptation when every sexual urge within you is screaming I WANT THAT SO BAD IT HURTS. Whilst I may find child abuse unpallatable, rather than join the rabid hordes looking for a swift and brutal justice, I think I'd rather just consider myself fortunate that my own urges are within the law of most lands.

At the end of it all can I even answer my own question?

The sexual predator. Abuses the child for a short time and the child earns enough for himself and may even get enough to send some home to the family. Possibly a chance that one day he can earn enough to start to change his life for the better. The abuser himself drawn to the child through a basic animal instinct which even he probably wishes he didn't have. The knowledge that should he be caught in the wrong circumstances he will be villified by all and sundry, publicly humiliated and probably spend a fair amount of his life in a prison.

The corporate abuser. For the child a constant grind every day and at the end of it all a mouthful of low grade food to sustain an existence. A future surely without hope. The abuser(s)? Some mega rich people we know if at all only by a company name and I wonder if they have ever given a thought to the children who put them where they are. The knowledge that if they paid the parents of these kids even a half decent amount to feed their families for the work they do that they'd only be slightly less well off themselves and the children wouldn't have to do what they do.

So which is worst then, the one driven by need or the one driven by greed?
Does society simply insist that I choose the first or is my reluctance to do so driven by jealousy of the riches of the other guy? My mind says to condemn both but that the latter has the option to be fair and change his ways while perhaps the former prays to his God to take away his evil thoughts only to be denied his wish. So perhaps I should choose the 2nd guy.........but then would I not happily swap positions with him given half the chance.

Perhaps I'M the hypocrite after all.

The corollary question to Thaiquila's is, surely: why is Christian society so fixated on sex?

Yes, I wonder. A vicarious thrill? Their noses in everyone else's business...literally. The last thing in the world that interests me is what other (consenting adults) people do in privacy...or, even, in the bushes. (I have better things to think about...like remembering a good time had getting it on myself and planning\fantasizing the next!)
Closer to home; the current tendency of bible thumpers and other bigots to link gay with chicken hawk. I wonder if it's a result of PC gone mad (more mad? maddest?) at it's lowest: It's no longer (PC) acceptable to take a swipe at gay\lesbian people--So make them all out to be pedophiles (And why they are arbitrarily raising the 'age')-- and if one objects, tries to defend or disassociate gay men or himself?... 'Well, you must be one too!' they sneer, superiorly.
Already; just traveling to Thailand and certain other countries marks you as, 'one of them.'
And haven't we had a strong dose of that asininity\asinine agenda right here?
And, looking at the number of posts on the topic; if a pedophile wants to find out where to go to find what he's looking for, in Thailand?... Where might he go to do it?

I too have heard people say, 'If I don't buy clothing made by child labor what do I wear?'...and it's true. Last time I went shopping, no matter the price point--The (So called) designers go to Hong Kong buy a 'lot' of a certain garment, have their logo put on it, so you can be a walking billboard\how else will everyone know you (were dumb enough to) paid an outlandish amount for that rag?...And mark it up 120%...or more--, everything I looked at was made in Taiwan, China, India or the Philippines.
I wish I did, but don't have an answer, nor, it seems, do those who rail against it. Not those here, at any rate--But it's so much fun to bitch about things you can't do anything about, or have no intention of trying to do anything about, if you might get up someones nose by laying it off on them. Some say, that's the fun of the Internet.
On second thought, the answer may be to write our government representatives and insist all imported goods be made by persons above the age of (What age?), earning a 'living wage' (How much?), working 'reasonable hours' (How long?) under 'decent, humane working conditions' (Please define.)--And how to recognize the offenders--Or worst offenders?.... Oh, sure. That would work like windscreen wipers on a duck's butt! Who will monitor such a program? Care to guess? The foxes will guard the hen house--And get paid for it, which will be passed on to.... I think I'll buy a spinning wheel and a loom--The weaving variety--and start making my own duds. Or a bale of cotton and a cotton gin.... I said the magic word: gin! Get me a fig leaf & to hell with it! But that's a small part of the problem. What about children working in industries the products of which don't go outside their home country?... Kiddies working in stone quarries, for pennies an hour, with no health care if they are injuried, under conditions that are not unlike the building of the pyramids, for instance?

Oh, yes, Nike. Finally boycots & threatened boycots got them to do better.
This from 2006 (And there are pages more--All, of course lies?)

http://english.ohmynews.com/articleview ... 4&rel_no=1 (http://english.ohmynews.com/articleview/article_view.asp?no=234494&rel_no=1)

It was announced today that Warren Buffett is donating thirty-seven-billion dollars ($37,000,000,000.00) To the Gates Foundation. Much will go toward fight AIDS in third world countries. Much of Buffett's money was made by investing in one (More?) of the companies mentioned earlier. What does that say and what does it have to do with this thread? I don't know, I'm well-known for being a dingbat; just thought I'd mention it.
(Maybe some of the money made from (using) third world people will make it back to the third world?)

All the former third world, now developed -- or at least developing -- countries that I can think of have gotten where they are now because first world countries invested in them, bought their labor and their manufactured products. Funny, I can't think of any who have pulled themselves out of poverty by selling sex.

Anyway, I've been in Thai factories -- more than one -- making Nike shoes before. How many of you have? The workers in those factories not only receive living wages, but also benifits that would be unimagineable for them anywhere else. There were definitely no workers under 22 or 23 there -- much less "children". Nike's human rights guidelines are very detailed and very strict. Compare that to a Thai-owned factory making shoddy Thai goods for Thai or third-world markets.

Of course, none of that will stop sobbing do-gooders like cottmann from refusing to wear trainers like a spoiled little girl. Get a life!

[Dodger]

If I interpreted Steve's comments correctly, and I think I did, the point he's making is that the focus on child abuse, as it relates to third-world child labor, doesn't get the attention it deserves, as society prefers to place the majority of focus on child sexual abuse, and he's absolutely correct.

Remember the old Pareto Theory (80/20 Rule). This principle is practiced in just about every business in the world because it helps people focus their energies on the vital areas where 80% of the problematic causes have been identified, versus, applying 80% of their energies focusing on areas where 20% of the causes reside. Unfiortunately, society rarely follows this theory, nor does the average person out there care enough to do anything about it.

My guess is that if you calculated the number of young children who are effected by third-world child labor abuse, and compared it to the reported child sexual abuse statistics, the children effected by child labor abuse would fall in the 80% range. But society has elected to focus on the topic realted to SEX...which has been the case throughout our history.

Sometimes we talk about society as if it resides outside of our own relm of exisitance, as if "society" is everyone around us - but not us. Well, WE, as gay visitors or residents of Thailand, are, recongnize it or not, the western society of Thailand. Having said that, I've spent 8 years observring OUR society in action, and it creates an extremly vivid picture. The grand majority of us are older gay men who come to Thailand for the opportunity to have sexual relations with boys one third our age. Please don't even give me that crap about how you love the food and the economical advantages, etc., etc., because that's just flat out denial. I just find it interesting, that withiin our own cultivated little sub-society, we have deemed it acceptable practice to have sexual relations with boys who are one third our age.

Thank God for our gay sub-society in Thailand, because that must mean what I am doing is OK.

But wait a minute, what if I told my family and friends that the reason I visit Thailand so often is not because of the tremendous deep sea fishing opportunites at Jomtin Beach. What if I told them the truth? Well, of course I would be branded a pervert. Being gay in my homeland society is bad enough, but favoring sexual realtions with boys one third my age would result in the brand of death.

Amazing how two different societies can have such radical differences regarding acceptebal human behavior. Or maybe societies just decide on what's acceptable based on the true inner desires (or, true inner fears) of the masses, who knows.

Well, of course I would be branded a pervert. Being gay in my homeland society is bad enough, but favoring sexual relations with boys one third my age would result in the brand of death.
Amazing how two different societies can have such radical differences regarding acceptable human behavior. Or maybe societies just decide on what's acceptable based on the true inner desires of the masses, who knows.

'Inner desires,' sexist, ageist attitudes, whatever...you got that right.
Consider the situation if one were straight and shacked up with a woman one-third his age: "Aww...isn't that sweet!... So lovely he could find happiness...at his age... So lovely she found a good man (provider)...."

[Smiles]

" .... but consider this for a moment.....for every child abused sexually for money by an adult how many children of an equally young age spend 12 hours a day knee deep in filthy water in gold or copper mines or work in sweat shops 7 days a week, every waking hour and all to earn what? BUTTONS ( as we'd say in Scotland ). All the while multi national companies rake it in on the back of these children.
I simply ask you this. Which is the greater evil? Who does the greater damage long term to the child?
The pedo - who if caught will end up in prison for a number of years, or the multi national multi million(billion?)aires... "

This kind of bogus comparison is pure NAMBLA code talk . . . a semi-Marxist "revolutionary" window dressing, the main intent of which is to "justify" older men having sex with ~ not just "younger" men, i.e. the 18/56 couplings fairly common within this Board membership ~ but children from 15 (or so ... pick a age which starts to make your stomach turn) down into the single digit ages.

If you disagree with this, then read the NAMBLA website yourself (and find it yourself ... it's easy) and you will find cascades of articles and personal/breathless testimonies wrapping the issue of old guys having sex with 9 yr olds up with Marx's dialectic, European/American capitalist imperialism, Che Guevera-ist romantic revolutionism bla bla bla ... ad nauseum.

It's all a nasty house of cards ... a dated 1930's Oxfordian-style leftist attempt to legitimise what is quite rightly see by most civilized people as taboo sexual behavior.

Interesting that our original poster "Steve" has had only had a total of 2 messages ever on this Board (both within this thread). Strange that a newbie member would begin a Sawatdee Forum posting career by starting a thread on "Aspects of Pedophilia".

IMHO - only

Cheers ....

[Aunty]

I agree that it is a meaningless premise. Two wrongs don't make a right, how can you possibly choose which hurt is worse, (and moreover why should such a choice be made anyway) and condemnation of one in no way implies acceptance of the other. They are both wrong and harmful to child's health and development, and both should be stopped.

I have the same suspicious as Smiles about the motivations of the OP, but there is a point about hypocrisy to be made.

I have said before here, I find pedophile-hunters just as creepy and repulsive as the pedophiles themselves, and I wish we could get rid of both of them. They disguise their lust for punishment and vengeance as caring for children. Most of the self-righteous types who oppose abortion or child abuse don't give a fig for the children, in the form of being willing to support the consequences of their policies. Let's see an anti-abortion bill that comes with a rider to raise taxes to pay for the parentless offspring. Let's see anti-child-labour laws that raise taxes to support the families who don't earn enough without their kids out working. Let's see pedo-hunters contributing substantial funds to the support of the kids they save. Heck, while we're at it, let's guarantee that all the old folks in our various societies will get quality support in their retirement.

It'll never happen- why? Because we live in a screwed-up society where hate and fear motivate people more than love.

At my age it doesn't take much to amuse me. I'm pleased dear old cottager made such an effort to respond despite in the same breath ignoring me. I'm also intrigued by the somewhat novel assertion that asking for clarification of someone's spending habits constitutes an ad hominem attack. Perhaps cottager was anticipating a suggestion of hypocrisy in response?

[PeterUK]

I

I have said before here, I find pedophile-hunters just as creepy and repulsive as the pedophiles themselves,

I agree with you. It's kind of like those scenes on the TV news of members of the public shrieking and banging on police vans as murderers or rapists arrive at court. Do I take consolation from the hate-filled faces of the would-be avengers? - no, I don't.

I would be curious to know if any posters have any thoughts as to why something that was socially accepted in another culture at another time in history is now universally condemned.

(Incidentally I prefer men in their late 20's.)

Because we eventually figured out it was unacceptable in a civilized socity, maybe? Like other wonderful, previously-accepted practices such as gladiator fights-to-the-death, feeding Christians to lions, burning suspected "witches" at the stake, making persons of certain religions live in ghettoes, and not allowing women to vote? Are you an idiot, or what?

Or what.

Bumper sticker: "Not enough lions."

I like how one of our posters, when personally attacked, responds with humor, so I'll do the same:

A priest is taking confessions and really needs to relieve himself. He calls the janitor to come over and shows him the list of sins and corresponding list of penances. After the priest leaves, a man enters the confessional and says that he has committed the sin of lying. The janitor looks at the list and tells him to say three тАЬHail MaryтАЩs.тАЭ The next person enters the confessional and says he has committed the sin of adultery. The janitor looks at the list and tells him to say three тАЬHail MaryтАЩsтАЭ and three тАЬOur FatherтАЩs.тАЭ The next person enters the confessional and says he has committed the sin of anal sex. The janitor canтАЩt find this one on the list, so he peeps out and motions for the altar boy to come over. тАЬWhat does the priest give for anal sex?тАЭ тАЬThree Oreos and a glass of milk.тАЭ

To answer the ruminations of Smiles and Opabinia (what does that mean or refer to? - may I ask)
I can say that I'm not in fact a pedo or pedo sympathiser looking to justify my own or someone else's activities. That said I don't mind that some may have their suspicions as I did leave the original posting deliberately short and uncluttered without much detail as it was my intention to provoke different opinions. I found it interesting to read as the thread branched off in varying directions. Hell, any thread which starts with child sex/labour abuse and eventually touches on religion, Karl Marx, abortion, Oprah Winfrey, communism, Nike and Che Guevara makes it worth the starting.
Why did I choose to flirt with paedophilia for my first post? A few reasons I suppose.
Simple circumstance to begin with ie. a raid on Sunee Plaza and a news item on child labour got me thinking. Also I am the type who enjoys playing devils advocate and I often like to challenge preconceived assertions. eg. I met an Iraqi doctor some time ago (pre Bush era) and the first thing I did was to start talking about Iran (which I found difficult as I know next to nothing about Iran). However I just wanted to probe to see if he had anything negative to say on Iran which I might just be able to find a different angle on. When I speak to an Irish person I'll often bring up religion etc etc...I think you get the point from that. I guess I work on the premise of "Is there anything more dangerous thing than a closed mind".

My own reaction to the Sunee raid headline of Farang caught with minor in raid on bar caused some evaluation of my own actions. When I read the headline I thought "well chuck him in prison and ask how he's doing during the next millenium celebrations. As I read on I find we're talking about a minor of 17 years. Yes I know, still a minor - but I compared that with my own actions of going to Pattaya and having sex with an 18 year old. How can I scream "HANG THE BASTARD" when what I do can't really be described as being a million miles away from the other guy. We all know that there are enough people in the world who would happily yell "pervert" in my direction so I question if I have the right to judge someone else.

Finally, two quick points.
First, I think the only answer to my original question IMO is to say that each case would have to be judged on it's own merits. In the instance which caused the thread to exist ie. old guy caught paying 17 yr old for sex versus 10 year old working 12 hours a day knee deep in filthy water and being paid the equivalent of 50cents a day for the privelige then I think if the premise of justice is to compensate for the suffering of the victim then surely the second story is easily the worst of the two.

and...as a curiosity of it's own....it is perhaps ironic in the circumstances that I have actually NEVER had sex with anyone under 18, not even when I was that same sweet age myself. Alas I was a late starter and hey, even at the age of 43 I'm still kinda hoping I'll be a late developer as well!

and not allowing women to vote?I was with you, boygeenyus, up until that point

Just posting to thank the mods. They know why.

"Opabinia" is an extinct Cambrian era organism. Do a google, some of the animals are fascinating.