Re: Crime and Punishment

Diana wrote:
> <sarban@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:1138625739.218882.152600@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> ><snip to>
> >> How about some examples? I can't think of any. Perhaps you have something
> >> in
> >> mind?
> >> >
> > You appear to be regarding say kissing a child in a prima facie
> > socially
> > acceptable way but out of an erotic motive as sexual abuse, (I may be
> > misunderstanding but that is what you seem to be saying.)
>
> A non-family member kissing a child on the lips is not prima facie socially
> acceptable. Indeed, I would have a problem with a non-family member/non
> REALLY good and long time friend of the family kissing my child anywhere at
> all.
>
> That's our culture.
>
> In cultures where such kissing is considered acceptable, strangers kissing
> each other in greeting, for instance, the situation is of course quite
> different. However, I don't remember you mentioning that such a kiss was a
> socially acceptable. I do remember that I mentioned that cultural context
> was important, however.
>
> > Now such behaviour can only do measurable harm by being recognised as
> > sexually motivated, as long as it is regarded as non-sexual it will be
> > if
> > anything beneficial. In fact the question of whether suspicion of it
> > being
> > sexually motivated is correct or not has no effect on the harm done.
> >
> > An entirely innocent kiss wrongly regarded as sexualised will do harm
> > while a sexually motivated kiss regarded as entirely innocent will be
> > if anything beneficial.
>
> Someone who whose acts fit entirely within the cultural norms (such as the
> example of the pedophile teacher who never acted on his fantasies) isn't an
> abuser no matter what his thoughts are. He may be in a private hell, always
> wanting something he can't have...and may be in danger of doing something
> very stupid if he doesn't get help...but that's different. I had the
> impression that you were talking about a kiss on the lips by someone who
> wasn't a family member, in a culture where that kiss could be seen as
> problematic.
>
> In other words, a kiss on the lips that needs to be excused to someone as
> 'innocent' because it looks wrong....is wrong. Actions taken within accepted
> cultural practices won't look wrong or need explaining, seems to me.
> >
> > Acts that are harmful if and only if they are (rightly or wrongly)
> > regarded as inappropriately motivated are by definition not acts
> > intrinsically
> > likely to do objective harm. Insofar as in a given society they do do
> > harm
> > this is more a matter of the harm done to children by societies
> > overreaction than anything else.
>
> Society doesn't overreact to actions that are within cultural norms. It is
> the oddball stuff that needs explaining, and in our culture (mostly) having
> a stranger or mild aquaintance kiss a child on the lips is oddball. I
> figure, if you have to explain that the motive was innocent, you shouldn't
> be doing it.
> >
Let us suppose a society that has clear agreed society wide generally
understood stable sensible conventions about what types of physical
affection
etc is appropriate between a given adult and a given child in a given
situation.
Conventions that the society is able to more or less justify
independently of
allegations about the hidden motives suspected behind certain types of
behaviour.

In that situation I would agree that it is prima facie censurable for
an adult to
break those conventions, and that one would condemn such transgression
much more severely if it was for the adult's sexual gratification, than
one would
for most other motives.

(I think it is clear that although we would both condemn such behaviour
in such
a situation you would condemn it considerably more strongly than I
would,.
However I'm doubtful whether its profitable to pursue this point of
difference any
further.)

The problem is that I don't think we live in a society with such clear
generally
agreed stable rules. Disputes between adults over children particularly
custody
disputes frequently involve claims that some apparently innocuous
behaviour is
in fact sexually motivated, rather dubious claims of this nature are
frequently
successful. (A woman won custody of her daughters by persuading the
judge
that it was inappropriate for her daughters to get into bed with their
father in
the morning in their pyjamas to watch television together.)

In general groups and individuals make allegations that not obviously
indecent
behaviour is sexualised, as a tactic against other groups,and
individuals and
as a means of condemming behaviuor towards children of which they
disapprove.

Obviously such allegations are more likely to be made against behaviour
and
individuals that break social norms but once such an allegation has
been made
it is definitely not a good defence to argue that whatever ones motives
may or
may not be, the behaviour itself was more or less within socially
accepted
boundaries.


IE It is unfortunately not true that allegations of sexual impropriety
always
require clear breaches of societies agreed norms by the accused adult.



Andrew Criddle
.

Loading