A dilemma. Please respond.

Half-formed posts, inchoate philosophies, and the germs of deep thought.

Moderator: Only_Humean

A dilemma. Please respond.

Postby Dionysus » Thu Oct 04, 2007 10:05 am

This will not be easy.

There are many taboos in our culture. Some, such as rudeness, are quite forgivable if the individual is considered to be, at heart, good. Others, particularly sexual offenses, are considered to be irredeemable aspects of an individual's character, forever a part of that character.

I am a violator of the most sacrosanct taboo of all: I am a sexual offender.

I will not go into details; suffice it to say that, at one point in my youth, I was convicted of a very serious, sexually-related crime. I've 'paid my dues', however little I thought (and think) of that particular reciprocal economy of violence that is the penal system, and I feel -- guilty.

The recent spate of cultural discourse on the topic - from television programs (To Catch A Predator) to the offender's registry - has made life, for me, not only unpleasant, but virtually unlivable. I will not here demand sympathy for a situation of my own doing; empathy, however, would be welcomed.

To make a long story short - perhaps sixty pages, should my design come to fruition - I intend to publish an essay, voicing my own views on this most occulted of all topics. It's been a very long time, and I, above all, am well-positioned to comment on the subject.

Unfortunately for myself, it will not be easy. I lack recourse to a publisher (and any suggestion here would be more than welcome) willing to tackle such an issue; and, furthermore, there's the obvious question of motivation which will undoubtedly rise if, by some intervention on the part of a dead God, I do find a way to make myself more public than I am already. I am more than prepared to donate any proceeds to charity, so as not to run afoul of legislation barring making profit from a crime; even to publish anonymously, should the need arise; and yet nevertheless I'm taken almost by fits of half-madness thinking of how utterly alien my own viewpoint will be interpreted by virtually everyone. To be sure, there is a desire on my part for self-aggrandizement; I cannot deny it. And nevertheless I feel I must publish it. I have no desire to absolve myself from responsibility, and yet my very own philosophical viewpoint demands that I deny moral agency.

If you've not yet recoiled in disgust - then how shall I proceed?

(For those who would attack me personally: am I not doing precisely what you others should like so very much to do, that is, taking ultimate responsibility for myself? The State wishes to make of me a public face: very well! I shall save them the effort and do it myself.)
Dionysus
 
Posts: 180
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 4:55 am

Postby Murex » Thu Oct 04, 2007 10:50 am

If your delemma is not finding a publisher, I would suggest focusing on writing first. Perhaps when it is more complete, or even finished, a publisher will be happy to take it.

The overall theme is odd, but only in your writing can you convince a reader (a publisher) that it was a worthwhile viewpoint.
All that can be imagined can, will, or does exist.
User avatar
Murex
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1315
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 10:46 pm
Location: Midwest US

Postby Kriswest » Thu Oct 04, 2007 12:37 pm

Well not all sexual offender crimes are assault. the problem I have with the gov't is they do not distinguish. They only publish that a person has been convicted of a sex crime but not the actual conviction.. A 23 yr old man that has sex with a 16 yr old girl can get convicted.. Now if its rape thats one thing but, if that 16 yrold girl lied about her age or consented then thats another thing.. even if she did lie the law is pretty strict the guy gets convicted in most cases. Is he guilty? Absolutely not, IMO. A 17 yr old boy can get convicted for having consentual sex with a 13 yr old girl.

Both males are stuck with having to register as a sexual offender. Society will automatically convict them again as a rapist or Pedophile. that is why if a person must register the exact reason must be put there too. Not all sexual crimes are horrible or should even be crimes. I know two men that have had this crap happen to them. And its not right.
I will be bitchy, cranky, sweet, happy, kind, pain in the ass all at random times from now on. I am embracing my mentalpause until further notice. Viva lack of total control!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This is not a test,,, this is my life right now. Have a good day and please buckle up for safety reasons,, All those in high chairs, go in the back of the room.
User avatar
Kriswest
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 20508
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 2:26 pm
Location: stuck in permanent maternal mode.

Postby Dionysus » Thu Oct 04, 2007 1:11 pm

Oh, no. I was quite deserving of my punishment. I simply take issue with the justification used for it: I did not violate anyone's 'rights', insofar as those are mere useful fictions. And neither did the penal system in turn inflict retribution on my 'soul'. Mine and theirs were equally acts of violence directed against a person, both done out of malice and a peculiar inner-state most akin to a battlefield. In neither case - not mine and not in the case of the liberal justice system - was there any forethought in the matter: because forethought, consciousness itself, requires 'direction': guilt therefore is always and inevitably retroactive. There is no mens rea; only acts of faith.

I can only tentatively compare the state of mind I was in to the relationship a conservative has with his liberal debating partner: the conservative feigns strength in the sight of something he views as destructive, and the liberal obligingly acquiesces to a relatively weak position, speaking here in terms of power. It is a question of power in every sense of the term: power acting creatively on the outside world to create a fantasy indistinguishable from 'reality', and power acting reactively in horror because it knows that this fantasy is false. In no case is it a question of mere 'domination', and certainly not one of sexual jollies.
Dionysus
 
Posts: 180
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 4:55 am

Postby Sauwelios » Thu Oct 04, 2007 2:17 pm

First, let me say I'm not outraged by anything you've said or implied. Secondly, I think you should ask yourself for what kind of public you are writing.

It seems to me your "innocence of becoming" has been spoiled by an enforced idea of "responsibility". So my viewpoint is quite contrary to that of "decent society": I regret your being tainted with the idea of "responsibility", whereas decent society will be indignant at your philosophical denial of a moral agency.

I am reminded of Twilight, Skirmishes, 45:

"The criminal type is the type of the strong human being under unfavorable circumstances: a strong human being made sick. He lacks the wilderness, a somehow freer and more dangerous environment [Natur] and form of existence, where everything that is weapons and armor in the instinct of the strong human being has its rightful place. His virtues are ostracized by society; the most vivid drives with which he is endowed soon grow together with the depressing affects—with suspicion, fear, and dishonor. Yet this is almost the recipe for physiological degeneration."

I do not distinguish between good and evil; I distinguish between health and sickliness. Perhaps your crime was already an expression of sickliness. Your book may at least be psychologically interesting.
"Someone may object that the successful revolt against the universal and homogeneous state could have no other effect than that the identical historical process which has led from the primitive horde to the final state will be repeated. But would such a repetition of the process--a new lease of life for man's humanity--not be preferable to the indefinite continuation of the inhuman end? Do we not enjoy every spring although we know the cycle of the seasons, although we know that winter will come again?" (Leo Strauss, "Restatement on Xenophon's Hiero".)
User avatar
Sauwelios
Philosophical Supremacist
 
Posts: 7182
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2006 7:07 pm
Location: Amsterdam

Postby Joker » Fri Oct 05, 2007 12:15 am

I don't believe in morality so your crimes mean nothing to me.

Although I do wish you luck in publishing and living in general amongst these hysteric times we all live in.
The utopia is smoldering in ashes.

Hypocrisy can only exist in a moral world. In a amoral world there is no hypocrisy.

We live in a kill or be killed world.
User avatar
Joker
Nihilistic Deconstructionist
 
Posts: 6765
Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 5:49 am
Location: Near snow covered mountains and pine forests five hundred miles from the nearest town or city.

Postby Ingenium » Fri Oct 05, 2007 12:58 am

First off, I'll lay out my cards. I think that the crime committed was beyond abhorrent and have strong doubts that the predilection can ever be properly controlled outside of complete confinement...

I'm a parent. And while I can't be 100% sure (unless it were to happen) that I'd try to kill someone who preyed on my child in that way, I can, at this sitting, put it somewhere above 50%.

With that said, I can separate it and empathize with your situation as it is now and respond with an opinion strictly from that perspective.

I think that it's possible to write an interesting and compelling essay no matter how repugnant any pieces contained within it are. It becomes a matter of how the author chooses to tell it. It will take a great deal of skill on your part to remain as honest as you must be, but to also tell the story from a perspective that is, for lack of a better word, ennobling. That's an essential quality, you either understand it and have the ability to relay that understanding...or you don't. As a potential reader, while I may be repulsed by your choices, and quite uninterested in hearing any justification for them, I can still see how going through such circumstances as you have can result in something worthwhile to say. Maybe. In any case, you'll have to find that voice if possible, no one can do that for you. But I think that if it's found, then you'll find someone somewhere who will think it worthy of publishing. That publisher would be the one to advise you on how the essay is actually presented to the public.

With that said, I'd say that to have the idea that the outcome of any creative effort is that it must be revealed to the public in order to be valid is not the right approach in the first place. Of course there's the hope to have it validated in that way, but that shouldn't be the primary motivation. If you have something to say, then it must be said. Let the universe (as it were) determine whether or not anyone reads it.
User avatar
Ingenium
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1723
Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2005 5:11 am
Location: Misogyny-free Zone

Postby Joker » Fri Oct 05, 2007 1:03 am

I don't support pedophilia as I see no use in it.

I will say that most cases of pedophilia could be stopped if parents payed more attention to their children and when such acts happen it is the fault of the parents most of the time.
The utopia is smoldering in ashes.

Hypocrisy can only exist in a moral world. In a amoral world there is no hypocrisy.

We live in a kill or be killed world.
User avatar
Joker
Nihilistic Deconstructionist
 
Posts: 6765
Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 5:49 am
Location: Near snow covered mountains and pine forests five hundred miles from the nearest town or city.

Postby Mr Reasonable » Fri Oct 05, 2007 3:17 am

Read it out loud wile standing next to a little girl and videotape it and put in on youtube. You may not get any royalties, but it'll sure as hell get publicity.
You see...a pimp's love is very different from that of a square.
Dating a stripper is like eating a noisy bag of chips in church. Everyone looks at you in disgust, but deep down they want some too.

What exactly is logic? -Magnus Anderson

Support the innocence project on AmazonSmile instead of Turd's African savior biker dude.
http://www.innocenceproject.org/
User avatar
Mr Reasonable
resident contrarian
 
Posts: 25896
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 8:54 am
Location: pimping a hole straight through the stratosphere itself

Postby Dionysus » Fri Oct 05, 2007 9:15 am

It wasn't a crime of pedophilia. I'll leave it at that.
Dionysus
 
Posts: 180
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 4:55 am

Re: A dilemma. Please respond.

Postby barbarianhorde » Fri Apr 12, 2019 6:07 pm

Pedophiles have tiny diccs.
This is why it exists.
they'd fuck a rabbit if they could catch one.
It is true that liberty is precious; so precious that it must be carefully rationed.
~ Владимир Ильич Ульянов Ленин

THE HORNED ONE
User avatar
barbarianhorde
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1607
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 2:26 pm

Re: A dilemma. Please respond.

Postby Meno_ » Fri Apr 12, 2019 6:45 pm

Dionysus posted this 12 years ago. I'd be interested as to how he fared during the intervening years, and since the legal implication have played out, it is his morale , or what's left of it, it's a fair guess that his acts were more an exhibition of a self destructive tendency, rather then one which focuses on the damage violated person.

I know of someone whos'e mom put her daughter up to instigate sexual impropriety with her ex, in order to gain material gain, based on a predisposed sense of anger and retribution.

As a result, everybody lost, and the ending was sad, in opposition to how things could have gone down in light of a more equitable proceeding like counseling.
Meno_
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4455
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am
Location: Mysterium Tremendum

Re: A dilemma. Please respond.

Postby barbarianhorde » Fri Apr 12, 2019 6:48 pm

Humans, man.

Humans, and sex.
It is true that liberty is precious; so precious that it must be carefully rationed.
~ Владимир Ильич Ульянов Ленин

THE HORNED ONE
User avatar
barbarianhorde
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1607
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 2:26 pm


Return to The Sandbox



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users