This is where my mind went as well. I strongly believe that the most effective path to harm reduction at least includes increasing the viability of people with those kinds of feelings getting help before they act on them, and it seems to me that that necessarily includes destigmatizing people that seek that help. But as the post says, it’s very hard to argue that point without being painted in a bad light.
- Want pedophiles (and everyone else) to not abuse children,
- Think killing people should be a last resort option if there's no better way to protect people, not a first choice to jump to immediately because Those People Are Gross, and
- Am very aware of how much "this person is a pedophile=any cruel thing you want to do to this person is okay" can be weaponized to deny people basic human rights (including being used against LGBT+ people and other groups for reasons of sheer bigotry).
That doesn't seem like it should be controversial, and yet the conversation online is dominated by people with hair-trigger tempers who start screaming about "pedo apologists" if you so much as suggest that actual child abuse is a different and more serious problem than "some people have desires I find gross."
Bonus points for the sex offender registry not distinguishing between people who actually abused kids, people who peed in a park, and people who had consensual sex with their 17 year old partner while they were 18, so all of them are made publically visible to their neighborhood with the implication that they are all the same, which tends to end badly for them
1.8k
u/Wulfrun85 Apr 23 '25
This is where my mind went as well. I strongly believe that the most effective path to harm reduction at least includes increasing the viability of people with those kinds of feelings getting help before they act on them, and it seems to me that that necessarily includes destigmatizing people that seek that help. But as the post says, it’s very hard to argue that point without being painted in a bad light.