Drug for pedophiles to be tested in Swedish trial
Underverse: "This is a testosterone lowering drug. You're not just reducing pedophilic behavior. You're reducing sex drive across the board. This is parallel to chemical castration. Immoral, borderline depraved.
If someone actively agrees to it, it's hardly immoral.
Consent does not determine morality, especially considering that individuals often lack complete information or can be indoctrinated to perceive information in a certain way. For example; if someone consents to be sacrificed to the gods the that they will bring the rain, that individual's slaying is still immoral.
Why is chemical castration immoral?The pedophile deserves no sympathy. When you sympathize, you get people who want to protect and even enable pedophiles.
Do you not see how disgustingly immoral this is? What you're advocating for is something worse than a witch hunt. There is zero evidence to suggest that sexual interactions between older and younger individuals are inherently harmful. In fact, there are logical arguments to suggest the opposite. So without evidence that this activity is inherently destructive, you want to go around killing people simply because you disagree with them. That is the worst kind of vigilante justice; it's barbaric and unfounded.
You are the racist of the new generation. "
Broods:"This is a god damn OUTRAGE.
It's almost impossible to get testosterone replacement therapy in Sweden and there is very little research done in regards to the effects of testosterone yet the hormone is integral to the well being of men and low Testosterone levels and hypergonadism has shown to adversely effect the quality of life and mental well being in men. I surely hope if this catches on it will be on a strictly voluntary basis and never offered as a part of a plea deal to get a lesser sentence.
Maybe they should offer this to homosexuals too? If you say homosexuals are born that way then you are obligated to extend the same courtesy to pedophiles.
This reeks of chemical neutering. The very notion is repulsive to me. What's the next step? Chemically neutering homosexuals or any man that is perceived to be too aggressive?
Statistics show that between one in 20, and one in 35 men are sexually attracted to pre-pubescent children. Due to the high rate of the figure, researchers believed it could be as a result of orientation in the same way as homosexuality or heterosexuality
The very notion is repulsive to me and it sets a scary precedent. Testosterone is what makes men in to men.
Then again if these pedos volunteer for it i'm not going to try and stop them i'm just scared it will become a thing when they see how effective it is. As soon as a man "acts out" or is too aggressive or have a too high libido they will try to get him on a hormone treatment to make him in to a prepubescent boy.
Is it effective? Sure, ask any bodybuilder who has ever been on a supra physiological dose of testosterone what happens when he goes of the drug. No libido, no sex drive. This is something bodybuilders try to avoid which is why they take other drugs to combat the shut down and help their natural test production. Living with low testosterone levels is a nightmare and have very adverse physical and psychological effects.
Not that there is any research being done on male hormones these days because testosterone = bad. Makes men aggressive and sexual.
I'm sure the feminists of this world would be overjoyed if they could control men in this way. Just read some of the articles where they say how "testosterone makes men aggressive, lowers empathy (lol what?) and heightens libido. Like it's some kind of disease they need to cure.
Sure why not, they do their time in prison then go out and rape some more. If catration could make it so they dont feel the need to go rape someone, what harm would it do? other then to the filthy rapists ofc. The world would be a better place with less rapists out there no?
so pretty much anyone convicted of rape then? A 17 year old who has drunken sex with his girlfriend who later claims he raped her. Lets say that he technically did rape her as there wasn't any consent but the circumstances were so that the man could feasibly have inferred consent. Should he get castrated too?
What about if a husband forces himself on his wife? Immediate castration?
I'm starting to think many of you guys would have been very happy to live in a benevolent totalitarian police state. Scary thought