Jeffery Epstein indicted on charges of child sex trafficking

[arcanine]

Well it turns out this absolute cunt has taken the easy way out. Shame we won't get to enjoy knowing he is rotting in prison for the rest of his miserable life. Though at least this way there is no way for him to ever harm anybody else.

 

[notimp]

Well it turns out this absolute cunt has taken the easy way out. Shame we won't get to enjoy knowing he is rotting in prison for the rest of his miserable life. Though at least this way there is no way for him to ever harm anybody else.

There you have your humanity. People sometimes only wait for excuses to bask in the suffering of others. Which they very happily will induce.

Understand, that I get just how effed up and wrong even just the part of what I read about his life was. But everytime someone tells me, I have children, so now I want to tell you about how I would have received joy from letting him rot, and was shortchanged by him killing himself, I think to myself - yes, this is also what society tries to prevent.

If you are personally connected to one of the victims - slightly different story. But you are not (statistically speaking). You are just sharing your violence fantasies with the world.

 

[IncredulousP]

There you have your humanity. People sometimes only wait for excuses to bask in the suffering of others. Which they very happily will induce.

Understand, that I get just how effed up and wrong even just the part of what I read about his life was. But everytime someone tells me, I have children, so now I want to tell you about how I would have received joy from letting him rot, and was shortchanged by him killing himself, I think to myself - yes, this is also what society tries to prevent.

If you are personally connected to one of the victims - slightly different story. But you are not (statistically speaking). You are just sharing your violence fantasies with the world.

Agreed. It's revenge, not punishment. Revenge doesn't cause anything but further suffering. His misery wouldn't unrape those kids, nor fix their lives, nor prevent something like this from happening again. It's a primal, emotional instinct to do harm to those that cause us misery, and while revenge may be cathartic, it is short-lived and ultimately fruitless.

 

[arcanine]

There you have your humanity. People sometimes only wait for excuses to bask in the suffering of others. Which they very happily will induce.

Understand, that I get just how effed up and wrong even just the part of what I read about his life was. But everytime someone tells me, I have children, so now I want to tell you about how I would have received joy from letting him rot, and was shortchanged by him killing himself, I think to myself - yes, this is also what society tries to prevent.

If you are personally connected to one of the victims - slightly different story. But you are not (statistically speaking). You are just sharing your violence fantasies with the world.

I have no moral qualms about revelling in the suffering of a monster who calculatedly trafficked children so that they can be raped over and over again. I think it would be immoral not to. If there isn't a horrifying punishment for this behaviour, then perhaps some people who might be considering it wouldn't think twice.

 

[spotanjo3]

The reason those people are pervert because of influence from porn. It made some people doing crazy things and disgusting things.

 

[notimp]

The reason those people are pervert because of influence from porn. It made some people doing crazy things and disgusting things.

*sigh*
What was it? Too much certainty, too much emotion.



(Also - no.)

Wait a little - edit to follow.

edit: @azoreseuropa : Here for you.


(And please dont directly switch to homophobia after watching that. )

Also - read this, if interested:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_History_of_Sexuality



Or this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus_in_Furs

So, the cause of sexual perversions is probably not porn. Although through porn, pretty much the vast majority of those have become more 'commonly accepted'. Which actually helps most people that are into something like that.

The thing is - we cant (nor should) do that with pedos, because we have to keep the well being of the child in mind. And when you add together the potential abuses of power (as in a power mismatch in a relationship) that might not be entirely consensual, and that a childs sense of self and the world is still developing, and that there is a built in dependency - you can easily mess up peoples lives pretty good at that point. Thats part of why its a crime. And there is little to no moral ambiguity there. Its a crime for a reason. Society shuns it, for a reason.

With other forms of sexual perversion - not so much anymore. (Trumps alleged pee tapes, mainstream enough for you? ) But as far as I know - there is no rise in sexually motivated crimes in the timeframe pr0n became widely available online. It probably even had the reverse effect. (Look for studies.. )

 

[WeedZ]

@notimp you need to get your thoughts together before posting, or at least edit your previous posts if you have an after thought. This double/triple/quadruple posting makes threads a pain to read.

 

[notimp]

The last posting was a direct reply to the posting before.

I edited it with more context.

I will keep it in mind in the future.

edit: Also some of the postings on the past page were 'work in progress' and only contextualized later.

So when people were into the coroner conspiracy - I first gave some (proven) context for a states shady action in the MLK case, then looked up the coroner, saw how many autopsies he did (has an impact on probability. people usually resort to conspiracy theories, when they think, that there is no way that something could be chance, but with 20.000 done in a lifetime that changes), then I posted a video on what kind of personality type the guy seemed to be (likes to be a celebrity). Then I read that he was actually employed by the defense, and was not - as indicated - overlooking the autopsy - so none of the earlier stuff mattered much anymore.

So first I was in fact finding mode - and then (later) posted something like a conclusion (Which made the topic 'disjointed'.).

While we are still pooling together factoids, its hard to have my conclusion ready to go as well...

I know that this is a sensitive topic - but then I also dont want to just be like - 'hey this sounds like a conspiracy theory' - so probably not true. Lets show people a little how to judge based on a few more things than just feeling. (probability, plausibility, ... that stuff.

Most often, when posting a video in this forum, I actually try to make analogies - that would allow people to see a little more of the circumstances in other cases - that seemed similar. I cant make a 'this is why, and what you should think' suggestion on those cases, because - they are analogies. Either they work for you - or they don't.

F.e.: When people stated that violent protest is just for people getting off on watching the world burn, I show them monks burning themselves on streets in protest historically, and people ridiculing them for the same reasons ('they just troublemakers') - they ridiculed all violent protest in the past. But also I'm hopefully responsible enough - to state multiple times, that violent protest is not needed, nor wanted in democracies, generally and specifically speaking, its just - that people usually don't do it 'only to watch the world burn'. The example was taken from a different thread - with a similar issue. I don't want to tell you how the world works. Sometimes I just want to present allegories. (Stories that seem similar, in maybe a context thats a little different.)

I have no moral qualms about revelling in the suffering of a monster who calculatedly trafficked children so that they can be raped over and over again. I think it would be immoral not to. If there isn't a horrifying punishment for this behaviour, then perhaps some people who might be considering it wouldn't think twice.

It can't be immoral not to derive pleasure from the suffering of another person. Because not all people do.

Now, your position is generally socially accepted. But then there is something about sharing that feeling with the public to get a "common/shared notion" of basking in someones suffering. We generally don't want that as a society. The second line you crossed was to feel deprived, once the other person died, because you (as per your argument), couldnt get enough of the suffering to feel - what you needed to feel.

So those sorts of feelings are normal or at least somewhat common. To try to connect in them with others, publicly is a little more problematic. To feel betrayed by someones death, because you couldn't see them suffer enough - is a little more over the line.

The point I would make is, that none of you getting pleasure out of it, actually would help the victims, or even potential victims in the future. So from that position as well, its hard to see your position as 'a moral one'.

Moral philosophy is not 'clear cut' though. So you could still be right and I could be wrong.

 

[IncredulousP]

The reason those people are pervert because of influence from porn. It made some people doing crazy things and disgusting things.

Please don't spread misinformation. People have been committing these acts millennia before porn existed.

 

[spotanjo3]

Please don't spread misinformation. People have been committing these acts millennia before porn existed.

I am talking about the future.. Not before that. It is much worse now after porn existed.

 

[TheMrIron2]

I am talking about the future.. Not before that. It is much worse now after porn existed.

Did you read any of the research notimp cited? His post completely debunks what you're saying.

 

[notimp]

I am talking about the future.. Not before that. It is much worse now after porn existed.

Actually no:

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/...evidence-mounts-more-porn-less-sexual-assault

Google for:

correlation porn sexual violence

to find more sources.

 

[IncredulousP]

I am talking about the future.. Not before that. It is much worse now after porn existed.

You can't know the future. Additionally, there are yet to be many studies on long-term effects of sexual crime rate due to new-age pornography.

I do believe it is also necessary to mention: not all child molesters are pedophiles, and not all pedophiles are child molesters.

Rape is a serious offense and the prime motives are very complex, psychologically. It is not solely attraction that incites molestation by molesters.

 

[arcanine]

It can't be immoral not to derive pleasure from the suffering of another person. Because not all people do.

I didn't mean it was immoral not to derive pleasure from it. I meant it is immoral not to do it. Punishing behaviour which is unacceptable is how animal societies work. Canines, apes, dolphins, and lots of other later-evolving mammals will inflict pain on members of their pack in order to bring them in line. If they don't do it, there is less incentive for the pack to remain well-behaved and cohesive. Put another way, if there are no negative consequences to an action then an individual is more likely to do it if they are already inclined to do so, whereas if they know there is a chance of a horrible consequence to them of that action, then they might (attempt to) restrain themselves from that action. There is nothing immoral about imposing punishment under circumstances like this, and failing to punish behaviour like this is immoral as it increases the likelihood of the behaviour being repeated and therefore impacts negatively on the welfare of others. Taking pleasure from knowing that a disgusting act is being punished is cathartic yes, and this is important for the human psyche. Again, I do not consider this immoral as long as the punishment is proportionate to the action.

Now, your position is generally socially accepted. But then there is something about sharing that feeling with the public to get a "common/shared notion" of basking in someones suffering.

You are assuming I share these views and attitudes with others. I don't. I don't need to know whether something is socially accepted or shared with the public, or a common/shared notion, to decide for myself whether or not I consider it to be moral. I make those decisions as an individual, not a member of a collective. It's what empathy is for. I don't need to negotiate morals with others because I can determine for myself whether or not my actions are harmful to others, and if that harm is necessary.

We generally don't want that as a society. The second line you crossed was to feel deprived, once the other person died, because you (as per your argument), couldnt get enough of the suffering to feel - what you needed to feel.

Would you not consider it a miscarriage of justice if he were let off on a technicality and allowed to go free with no punishment? How is it any different to know that this happened because of suicide?

So those sorts of feelings are normal or at least somewhat common. To try to connect in them with others, publicly is a little more problematic. To feel betrayed by someones death, because you couldn't see them suffer enough - is a little more over the line.

Again, I don't care if this is a line for others. If somebody has orchestrated the rape of children then I will openly acknowledge that I derive pleasure from knowing that they now are suffering as a result.

The point I would make is, that none of you getting pleasure out of it, actually would help the victims, or even potential victims in the future. So from that position as well, its hard to see your position as 'a moral one'.

Ahh, I think I see the disconnect here. I am not feeling pleasure on my own behalf. It's not a sense of self-satisfaction that I KNOW that MY NEED for retribution was met. As you have said, it doesn't affect me at all either way as I don't know the victims or the perpetrator. But empathy allows me to take the perspective, to an extent, of the victims and the people who love them. And I know that THEY would be justified in feeling robbed of the knowledge that he is being punished for his actions, and I feel cheated on their behalf. The pleasure I feel in knowing a disgusting child rapist is now suffering is because I know that this will represent in some way reparations for the victims and their families.

Moral philosophy is not 'clear cut' though. So you could still be right and I could be wrong.

Well there we definitely agree. I do not believe in objective morality, but I think that wellbeing is a reasonable basis for some shared understanding of morals. And a world without punishment would be contrary to wellbeing in my opinion.

 

[EmulateLife]

I think porn can trigger certain individuals that are already sick in the head. There's this channel Court TV and they show entire trials here in U.S. One just finished in Florida where this 29 year old guy was obsessed with this porn cam model from Bulgeria, and he stole like 200k from his family and gave it to her. Then when they tried to stop him he murdered his mom, dad and brother. He thought he was in a relationship with this women.

 

[notimp]

I think porn can trigger certain individuals that are already sick in the head.

Yes, potentially - but then they are very likely to get a 'release' shortly thereafter.. So the thing of 'obsessing about some thing that you might want, but dont have' - doesnt accumulate and doesnt amplify negative (harmful) thoughts in the same way. Because its actually interrupted by periods of feeling good. I've not read into the theory of sex addiction (think David Duchovny ) so I dont know when for some people it becomes bothersome - but generally, its really not that much of a problem.

If you look at the relationship between sex crime, and availability of porn in society.

 

[notimp]

The department of public prosecution of the virgin islands currently sues the Epstein trust for compensation payments in cases where the accusation reads as follows:

The Billionaire had raped and held hostage up to a dozen children on the isle of Saint James during a period from 2001 to 2019. One such 15 year old women, according to the accusation papers, was abused by Epstein, and then tried to escape the Island swimming, was caught and held hostage again.

The accusations before Epsteins suicide only covered the period from 2002 to 2005.

Epstein owned two islands in the region, and according to the prosecution had created a professional network of human trafficking to get young women, between the ages of 12-17 onto the Islands by boat, helicopter, or plane.

Now - the attorney general of the Virgin Islands is sufficiently neutral by all accounts and the Virgin Islands if anything has an incentive not to get into the media with human trafficing again, so you ought to believe, that they have a case here. Presumption of innocence also isnt exactly applicable here, because the guy actually killed himself.

src: f.e.: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jan/15/jeffrey-epstein-virgin-islands-trafficking

What was the Trump quote again?

Trump called Epstein a ‘terrific guy’ who enjoyed ‘younger’ women before denying relationship with him
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...1e0f00-a1be-11e9-bd56-eac6bb02d01d_story.html

How young Donald, how young exactly?

 

[eyeliner]

There you have your humanity. People sometimes only wait for excuses to bask in the suffering of others. Which they very happily will induce.

Understand, that I get just how effed up and wrong even just the part of what I read about his life was. But everytime someone tells me, I have children, so now I want to tell you about how I would have received joy from letting him rot, and was shortchanged by him killing himself, I think to myself - yes, this is also what society tries to prevent.

If you are personally connected to one of the victims - slightly different story. But you are not (statistically speaking). You are just sharing your violence fantasies with the world.

I apologise for the late intervention, but:
If any sonofabitch ever mistreated one of my children, wife, mother or brother, I'd make sure that same sonofabitch suffer, long and hard and I would have no problems in killing him myself, preferably with a whole lot of suffering on his/her part.

Some things are inexcusable (molesting / rape / murder / abuse), and I'd make pretty sure I'd have my time with that specific entity. In anyway, taking as long as it took, I'd find him and would have my way.

Yes, I AM ALL YOU REGARD AS WRONG. I bask in the suffering of molesters or any other that attacks women and children, or men. I love to know they suffer if they go to prison, preferably turned to bitches, ending in suicide later.

Yes, I am also human.

 

[notimp]

And thats a white knight, gone too far (self justice, ...).

You have to take the anger out when it comes to punishment. (Rule of law, not rule of emotion, he said, or vendetta). For the perpetrator in this case (dozen to a hundred of child trafficing incidences, hindering investigations, ...) a life sentence was already the likely outcome.

You dont have to one up that with 'i'd have killed him personally'. The crimes already can't be undone.

Now what do we do with Donald Trump who had known about that guys reputation, not only did nothing, but visited his parties and gave him additional social reputation by giving statements to the media what a great guy he was?

(Part of the real answer is 'stop personalizing politics' btw.)

 

[eyeliner]

Look, man... Donald Trump is an idiot, but is he a molester?
You can't lock up someone for being an idiot, but you can surely punish crimes. He'll have his due.