ginocox

Perhaps we should at least get our terms straight.

I’m not a psychologist and am neither competent nor qualified to diagnose psychological disorders, but like most denizens of Internet message boards, I’m not about to allow a lack of formal credentials to prevent me making outrageous unfounded claims with absolute conviction. I did, however, read a few articles on the topic while researching my latest novel, Presumed Guilty.

Stephen David Grant was charged with fifteen counts of “of adult abuse of position of trust – causing or inciting sexual activity with a child aged 13 to 17.”

According to Wikipedia, “Pedophilia or paedophilia is a psychiatric disorder in which an adult or older adolescent experiences a primary or exclusive sexual attraction to prepubescent children, generally age 11 years or younger.” However, some authorities use thirteen as the upper limit.

It would be unfair and inaccurate to call Grant a pedophile. Assuming his actions were precipitated by an underlying psychological disorder or orientation, it is more likely to have been ephebophilia, a sexual preference for post-pubescent teens.

The term pedophile is often used casually to describe any attraction to individuals younger than twenty-one, but pedophilia, hebephilia and ephebophilia are distinct orientations. As many of us teach English, we should try to use correct terminology.

As the father of two young boys, I am concerned about pedophiles; however, I also recognize that pedophilia is a psychological disorder. Nobody knows what causes it, but it usually manifests around puberty. Most pedophiles begin molesting in their early teens. I’m more concerned that my boys could be molested by an older playmate than by a teacher or priest.

As part of my research, I transferred the sex offender registry for the City of Los Angeles into an Excel spreadsheet and ran some statistics. The numbers are distressing. For example, forty-one percent were black and forty-two percent were Hispanic. Either L.A. minorities are much more likely to commit sex offenses or they’re more likely to wind up on the registry due to some form of systematic discrimination. If it’s discrimination, the number of offenders is much higher than the registry would suggest.

Apparently Grant was only thirty-seven. Judging by his photograph, he was a bit stocky, but not morbidly obese. It seems a bit young to drop dead.

If we assume the worst case scenario in the 13-17 age group, age 13, the wikipedia psychology thing is wide of the mark. A parent has the right to consider their 13 year-old a "child." Children and young adults develop at different rates, both physically and mentally. A 13 year-old could be very mature, or could still remain very child-like. It is not for random strangers, or websites, to say that a 13 year old is no longer a child. It is for the parents to know their own child's maturity, and the legal system is supposed to protect the rights of decent parents to raise their kids according to what is safest for a given child.

I consider sex with age 1 to 15 to be in the immensely broad bracket of "paedophilia", but this has to be handled differently on a case-by-case basis. This is because of two factors. The first is the relative development rates of the individual children, including the possiblity of a child being in some way mentally-handicapped (diagnosed or not) and having an emotional age possibly ten years below their physical age. The second, and extremely important reason, is that the parents have the right to raise their children as children, until such time that the parents consider the child mature. The legal system and wikipedia are completely trumped by the parents' God-given right to wish for their children to remain children until age 16 or older, be that for protecting the sanctuary of the childhood they have spent so long nurturing and protecting, or for cultural/religious reasons.

I did enjoy reading your post, and you make some good points. This is a huge and complex picture, not least because of the huge variations in the attacker profiles. Some attacks on children are brutal violent rapes, some are viewed by the adult as genuine romance, to the point where some old guy brings bunches of roses to a four-year old and thinks it is true love. There are many forms of paedophilia, it is not only complex because of the age-issue, the diverse child-development rates, but because of the different motivations of the adults, which can differ like night and day. That is why I agree with your point about how "casually" the term paedophilia is thrown around in the media, without being qualified by the specific circumstances, which really govern the severity of the crime being labelled.

I also agree completely with the many posters who say that criminal-background checks on all teachers should be mandatory, and enforced with zero-tolerance efficiency. These are young lives, which need to be handled with great care, by normal good-natured adults only.

Let’s clarify a few items.

First, the age brackets were not defined by Wikipedia, but by the American Psychiatric Association (APA) in it’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5), the purpose of which is to offer a common language and standard criteria for the classification of mental disorders, so that no clinical psychiatrists use an age range or other criterion that is different than that used by others.

Second, according to another post, Grant was apparently never accused of having sex with children. Apparently he impersonated a fictitious teenage girl over the Internet in order to entice six of his students to send him images and/or videos of themselves in the nude or masturbating.

Third, pedophilia is a psychological disorder that meets certain criteria established by APA. I don’t know if emotional age and intellectual development are part of the criteria. The distinction between pedophilia, hebephilia, ephebophilia and other forms of chronophilia and paraphilia may not be significant to parents, but are important to diagnosis and efforts to treat patients. The age of the victim and the difference in ages between the victim and the assailant are also considered in determining penalties. Child molestation is a criminal act which may be precipitated by pedophilia, hebephilia, sadism or some other psychological disorder. While I’m not an expert, I’m not sure I would call Jesse Timmendequas a pedophile, even though he molested at least three children. He obviously has many psychological issues, but I think of him as a sort of dimwitted Hannibal Lecter. Like Clarice Starling, I’m not sure what he is.

My original point was that that Grant did not meet the clinical definition of a pedophile and seemed more like an ephebophile. I think the distinction is important and I believe we do both the English language and the public a disservice if we lump different psychopathologies together. I would not have considered Grant an immediate threat to either of my young sons. The elder is four, the younger is five months old. However, I would consider a pedophile an immediate potential threat.

Society tends to envision pedophiles as dirty old men. Over half the registered sex offenders in Los Angeles are fifty or older. But pedophiles don’t reach their fiftieth birthday and abruptly lose interest in age-appropriate relationships and decide to start viewing kiddie porn and molesting eight-year-old boys. Pedophiles begin molesting around the age of puberty by enticing younger children to disrobe and engage in sexual acts. We should caution our children to avoid dirty old men attempting to entice them into their cars with Walnettos, but we should also caution them against older boys who may want them to disrobe or to touch their private parts.

While many would consider Grant a vile pervert, calling him “Pervert Stephen Grant” and “vile Grant” hardly qualifies as objective reporting.

Paraphrasing the barrister’s remarks, while directly quoting the judge, also gives the report a slight bias against Grant.

Reporters should let the facts speak for themselves. I am constantly annoyed, particularly with CNN.com, for trying to amp interest in stories by calling incidents or images shocking or disturbing. I want Jack Webb to step in as Joe Friday and say, “Just the facts, ma’am.”

I have been trying to collect unpaid wages for the past two years through a suit filed in Central Labour Court. My next hearing date is not until December. I was one of at least eight teachers defrauded by a disreputable agency during a single term at two campuses. The others have already returned to their home countries and abandoned any hope of restitution.

Everything is stacked against you.

Although the judges are fluent in English, you need a translator at every hearing and all documents must be translated into Thai.

When the respondent failed to appear at several hearings, the case was automatically continued. If the complainant fails to appear without providing good reason, the case is dismissed.

Before we were permitted to file, he clerk sent us to other ministries several times to obtain documents that proved to be non-existent. They could have simply called the ministries and asked that the documents be faxed, but refused to do so.

The school stonewalled us, allegedly because the agency was bribing a corrupt official.

Even fellow Western expats thwarted efforts to obtain justice. When I attempted to post messages asking for other Teachers who had also been defrauded to join the suit, my post was deleted and I was given a demerit for attempting to advertise.

Even in the unlikely event that I prevail, I am but one of hundreds of teachers who are routinely defrauded and subjected to unfair working conditions, such as being compelled to work without a work permit and signing teachers to ten-month contracts.

By my calculations, it costs about ฿2,500/month and takes about 16 hours/month to maintain a tourist visa. Many teachers only earn ฿30,000 or ฿1,000/day, so failing to provide them a work permit robs them of ฿4,500/month. Many teachers only net ฿26,000 or ฿312,000/year, even less in the provinces. If you want to retire in Thailand, you need to show an income of ฿800,000 or 2½x the salary of many teachers.

Does this make sense?

Ok accept what your saying, but lest not forget your also willingly committing an illegal act by being prepared to work without a WP which leaves people open to being " defrauded" so yes the employer is acting illegally but so is the employee, knowingly in a lot of cases

If more "English" teachers refused to work without a WP there would be fewer around, therefore the schools would need to get there act together and provide WP and one presumes higher salaries as well, so in some respects people who do work illegally are enabling the employers

Balderdash!

You are blaming the victims and your logic makes about as much sense as those who suggest rape victims encourage attacks by wearing provocative clothes. Poppycock! I’ve never worn a brassiere and nobody has tried to assault me. Quod erat demonstrandum.

The agencies deceive the teachers. They promise to provide a work permit and include their assurances in their advertising, their contracts and their e-mails. But, they tell the teachers they don’t obtain the permit until after the teacher has completed a probationary period. Then they tell them they need additional paperwork from the teachers. Then they claim they’re waiting for paperwork from the school.

They also string the teachers along with lies about their compensation, the teaching materials they promised to provide, office supplies, etc.

Eventually, the teachers realize it’s all a body of lies. Most cut their losses and quit. One complained and was fired on spurious grounds. I stuck it out for the full term primarily because I could see the disruption this was causing the other students and I felt a sense of responsibility and commitment. I was also trying to convince the school to terminate their contract and hire me directly.

There were supposed to be two native English teachers at that school. One for P1, P2 and P3, while I had P4, P5 and P6. The students who weren’t in my classes had classes taught by nine different instructors, including myself as a substitute for a few classes. Five of those instructors weren’t native English speakers, including a Frenchman, a Russian and three Thais, although in fairness, the Russian’s English was very good.

Teachers have roughly zero bargaining power with the schools. Now some schools are hiring English teachers from Nigeria and some other African nations, who work for ฿25,000/month on a ten-month contract with no work permit. They still need to maintain their tourist visas during the unpaid months, so they pay about ฿30,000/year for their tourist visa, which may be an overstatement, as my figures are based on prices charged Europeans. There are lower-cost, no-frills runs popular with Filipinos and one can probably save a few hundred baht by avoiding the services all together. But let’s call it ฿25,000/year. And they sacrifice about 16 hours/month on visa runs and trips to Immigration, the equivalent of working an extra month without pay. So they work the equivalent of eleven months for ten month’s pay and net ฿225,000/year or ฿18,750/month. And the students are instructed by teachers with a reasonable grasp of grammar but heavy accents.

But perhaps the administrators receive bonuses for saving money on their English instruction and the enhanced job satisfaction experienced by the administrators will filter down and improve the students’ educational experience and grasp of the future pluperfect subjunctive mood.

Perhaps we should at least get our terms straight.

I’m not a psychologist and am neither competent nor qualified to diagnose psychological disorders, but like most denizens of Internet message boards, I’m not about to allow a lack of formal credentials to prevent me making outrageous unfounded claims with absolute conviction. I did, however, read a few articles on the topic while researching my latest novel, Presumed Guilty.

Stephen David Grant was charged with fifteen counts of “of adult abuse of position of trust – causing or inciting sexual activity with a child aged 13 to 17.”

According to Wikipedia, “Pedophilia or paedophilia is a psychiatric disorder in which an adult or older adolescent experiences a primary or exclusive sexual attraction to prepubescent children, generally age 11 years or younger.” However, some authorities use thirteen as the upper limit.

It would be unfair and inaccurate to call Grant a pedophile. Assuming his actions were precipitated by an underlying psychological disorder or orientation, it is more likely to have been ephebophilia, a sexual preference for post-pubescent teens.

The term pedophile is often used casually to describe any attraction to individuals younger than twenty-one, but pedophilia, hebephilia and ephebophilia are distinct orientations. As many of us teach English, we should try to use correct terminology.

As the father of two young boys, I am concerned about pedophiles; however, I also recognize that pedophilia is a psychological disorder. Nobody knows what causes it, but it usually manifests around puberty. Most pedophiles begin molesting in their early teens. I’m more concerned that my boys could be molested by an older playmate than by a teacher or priest.

As part of my research, I transferred the sex offender registry for the City of Los Angeles into an Excel spreadsheet and ran some statistics. The numbers are distressing. For example, forty-one percent were black and forty-two percent were Hispanic. Either L.A. minorities are much more likely to commit sex offenses or they’re more likely to wind up on the registry due to some form of systematic discrimination. If it’s discrimination, the number of offenders is much higher than the registry would suggest.

Apparently Grant was only thirty-seven. Judging by his photograph, he was a bit stocky, but not morbidly obese. It seems a bit young to drop dead.

"It also portrays a trafficker who claims he has sold more than 500 Cambodian girls, some as young as 14, without ever being arrested by police."

I always find it rather strange that the so-called "film makers" put such subjects in front of their cameras to get good material and make their film more "sellable" and then wave those crooks goodbye just like that once the footage is complete, without a blink... If I were cameraman, sound tech, stringer or whomever and I would hear and see someone boasting about selling 14 year olds into prostitution, never getting caught, I'd certainly know what I'd do to that guy after hours. Press and film truly do whatever it takes as long as it suits their cause. Sickening!

If they betray their sources, would they ever be able to obtain another story?

I have been trying to collect unpaid wages for the past two years through a suit filed in Central Labour Court. My next hearing date is not until December. I was one of at least eight teachers defrauded by a disreputable agency during a single term at two campuses. The others have already returned to their home countries and abandoned any hope of restitution.

Everything is stacked against you.

Although the judges are fluent in English, you need a translator at every hearing and all documents must be translated into Thai.

When the respondent failed to appear at several hearings, the case was automatically continued. If the complainant fails to appear without providing good reason, the case is dismissed.

Before we were permitted to file, he clerk sent us to other ministries several times to obtain documents that proved to be non-existent. They could have simply called the ministries and asked that the documents be faxed, but refused to do so.

The school stonewalled us, allegedly because the agency was bribing a corrupt official.

Even fellow Western expats thwarted efforts to obtain justice. When I attempted to post messages asking for other Teachers who had also been defrauded to join the suit, my post was deleted and I was given a demerit for attempting to advertise.

Even in the unlikely event that I prevail, I am but one of hundreds of teachers who are routinely defrauded and subjected to unfair working conditions, such as being compelled to work without a work permit and signing teachers to ten-month contracts.

By my calculations, it costs about ฿2,500/month and takes about 16 hours/month to maintain a tourist visa. Many teachers only earn ฿30,000 or ฿1,000/day, so failing to provide them a work permit robs them of ฿4,500/month. Many teachers only net ฿26,000 or ฿312,000/year, even less in the provinces. If you want to retire in Thailand, you need to show an income of ฿800,000 or 2½x the salary of many teachers.

Does this make sense?

They should march a couple of elephant calves out and shove them into the grinders as well, as that's what they're doing -- condemning more elephant to slaughter by poachers.

I researched this for my recent novel, “Presumed Guilty.” The main obstacle in surveillance systems is bandwidth. Surveillance cameras, particularly HD models, generate massive volumes of digital data, which has to be transmitted to a computer system and stored. It’s generally necessary to build a separate network dedicated to the cameras, as they will overload a data network. Police departments are facing a similar challenge with body-cams.

I strongly suspect the problem is not that they don’t have functioning cameras or that they fail to maintain them, not that they require much maintenance unless they are vandalized, but that they don’t have the data network to capture the footage the cameras would generate. So, they rely on the cameras as a psychological deterrent. But such deterrents may not be effective with radical jihadists, separatists or anarchists.

Burning contraband makes sense for pirated DVDs, heroin and counterfeit currency, which have no legitimate alternative use and require no scarce resources for their production. But it makes no sense for ivory, particularly if the volume involved is seventeen tons. All you do is decrease supply, which increases the price and encourages more poaching.

One can only hope corrupt officials somehow manage to substitute fake ivory and smuggle for the real material back onto the black market. Otherwise, they are simply condemning more animals to death at the hands of poachers.

Often referred to as a "love hate relationship"..........she loves the Money, he Hates being alone, and look what the money can get.

This topic and subject matter just keeps on revolving. same old arguments, same old regurgitated but slightly re-worded responses.

I disagree.

I'm not suggesting that big age gaps in relationships are wrong because I don't believe they are. If a 55 year old wants to date or marry a 25 year old, all well and good. If that's based on money or whatever, who cares?

I'm suggesting that Thai girls under the age of 22 - unlike similarly aged girls in the USA or Europe - don't really have the emotional maturity to consider the implications and ramifications of having a physical relationship with a man three times their age and, therefore, should be protected from predatory foreigners who are far more likely to seek them out purely for sex.

I'd like to see it extended to Thai men too but there are some cultural aspects that might cause stiff resistance.

Most of us are from countries where the sight of a 60 year old man clearly in a physical relationship with a 17 or 18 year old girl would be considered highly objectionable so most of us wouldn't have a problem with the passing of such a law.

As your knowledge and understanding of such things is clearly superior, is one to assume that you have had a relationship with a man three times your age?

Why stop there? Let’s outlaw all behavior that may reasonably or otherwise seem offensive to anybody else. If there is any question as to whether a form of behavior, such as posting insipid or sophomoric messages, is offensive, we can simply post a description or video clip on the web and if anybody anywhere considers it offensive, it will be considered illegal.

If we are to assume the mantle of protecting young Thai girls from foolish romantic and/or sexual liaisons, let’s also outlaw relationships with Thai boys who haven’t proven they can hold down a job more challenging and rewarding than hustling tourists, driving a motorcycle taxi or harvesting rice and mangoes.

In fact, since both love and desire are irrational, it follows that both emotions are foolish. Let’s simply outlaw love, romance, desire and intimacy. Then nobody will be offended.