Reducing the sex drive of a sex offender

[markern]

I heard a therpist say the other day that there is a quite good rate of success in treating former sex offenders when they realy want to work towards change. They have a pretty good chance of changing their sexual desires and if not learn to contain their remaining destructive desires through learning more emphaty with victims and self controll techniques. This made me think that maybe some techniques from eastern traditions could be beneficial for them. For many of these people it is a problem during treatment that despite of a genuine will to change, their sexual desire can at times be so great that even though they know it is wrong, they might still offend. If they could aply some qigong or yoga techniques that reduces sex drive they would be less likely to offend in this period. If they manage to change their desires fundamentaly so that the urge to offend is no longer there, they could use similar techniques to get the sex drive back. Does anyone know of good techniques to reduce sex drive?

 

I would presume diet has quite a lot to say. Probably not much meat. I know a couple of yoga poses that are said to reduce sexual desire. I have heard that accupuncture can be used for this as well and it makes sense to me that it can. Presumably there are also some herbs and some qigong techniques.

 

Are there also techniques one can use in an acute situation like drawing the energy away from the genitals and up towards the head or into the microcosmic or accupressure points or breathing techniques?

[Desert Eagle]

directing the energy upward using exercises: shoulder stand, head stand, Uddiyana Bandha, shaolin iron head.

 

using herbs and foods:

 

directs upward: Fo Ti, ginko biloba, basil (long leaf).

 

reduces sexual drive: camphor, sage.

 

Around where I live they use camphor in foods for the prison, university and college to reduce the sexual drive of prisoners and students.

 

Sage combines being aromatic and estrogenic, these two attributes in general reduce the male sexual drive.

Edited November 4, 2008 by Desert Eagle

[Trunk]

Around where I live they use camphor in foods for the prison, university and college to reduce the sexual drive of prisoners and students.

From the wikipedia entry on camphor (link):

Camphor is readily absorbed through the skin and produces a feeling of cooling similar to that of menthol and acts as slight local anesthetic and antimicrobial substance. There are anti-itch gel and cooling gels with camphor as the active ingredient. Camphor is an active ingredient (along with menthol) in vapor-steam products, such as Vicks VapoRub, and it is effective as a cough suppressant. It may also be administered orally in small quantities (50 mg) for minor heart symptoms and fatigue.[7]

 

In the 18th Century, it was used by Auenbrugger in the treatment of mania.

[Desert Eagle]

Symptoms of mania include rapid speech, racing thoughts, decreased need for sleep, hypersexuality, euphoria, impulsiveness, grandiosity, and increased interest in goal-directed activities.

 

so camphor calms them down, cools them down, sexually, physically and mentally. useful for police states.

Edited November 4, 2008 by Desert Eagle

[Anabhogya-Carya]

directing the energy upward using exercises: shoulder stand, head stand, Uddiyana Bandha, shaolin iron head.

 

 

 

Around where I live they use camphor in foods for the prison, university and college to reduce the sexual drive of prisoners and students.

 

 

 

What population drugging place do you live in?

[Desert Eagle]

population drugging place

 

isn't that almost everywhere now? especially with fluoridation and vaccinations? most socialist, authoritarian, dictatorships, and absolute monarchies have these social control measures built in.

 

wouldn't a better solution be to teach everyone chi kung from an early age?

Edited November 4, 2008 by Desert Eagle

[h.uriahr]

Lol, every criminal is successful if they have a want and desire to change. I'm not really sympathetic towards sex offenders. Reducing the sex drive is cuttin the ol berries off and giving them a labotomy.

[ZenStatic]

Around where I live they use camphor in foods for the prison, university and college to reduce the sexual drive of prisoners and students.

 

If you live in the United States, that most likely isn't true. Someone may have said that, but it is indeed illegal to drug inmates with anything, even if it is to reduce sex drive, without their consent or knowledge.

[h.uriahr]

If you live in the United States, that most likely isn't true. Someone may have said that, but it is indeed illegal to drug inmates with anything, even if it is to reduce sex drive, without their consent or knowledge.

 

I can see why they would do that but I believe it's an old 'wives tale' as they say. I've heard the same about the military food too.

[Desert Eagle]

If you live in the United States, that most likely isn't true. Someone may have said that, but it is indeed illegal to drug inmates with anything, even if it is to reduce sex drive, without their consent or knowledge.

 

Well not USA, and maybe it's not considered a drug maybe a spice, it is used in food and sweets. Try to increase the amounts and frequency of a certain ingredient and it's effect will be more prominent so with something as strong as camphor it doesn't take long to get results.

[h.uriahr]

Sex crimes are committed in prison and theres also man on man and woman on woman sexual relationships voluntarily of course so obviously in the US they arent being drugged

[Anabhogya-Carya]

Lol, every criminal is successful if they have a want and desire to change. I'm not really sympathetic towards sex offenders. Reducing the sex drive is cuttin the ol berries off and giving them a labotomy.

 

Law is subjective. Sex "offenders" are only offenders because society deems it so, not because of an objective standard. Society have existed in the past were things like pedestry and lust murder (in ritual) were practiced, normal, accepted and ingrained into the social fabric. There is nothing inherently wrong with it. Governments of the future could make heterosexual relationships illegal for all I know... If people with your opinion are in charge the majority of us would get castrated and lobotomized.

[Trunk]

...an old 'wives tale' as they say. I've heard the same about the military food too.

Apparently in US boot camp a drug is given so that morning erection/sex doesn't occur. I saw an interview with an actor who did an army movie. Prior to the movie, several of the actors were put through a mock boot camp with cooperation of the US military, and were given the drug. Trainees are under extreme stress during boot camp, and I assume the intent is to conserve their strength and disuade rape and relationships.

Edited November 4, 2008 by Trunk

[Apech]

Law is subjective. Sex "offenders" are only offenders because society deems it so, not because of an objective standard. Society have existed in the past were things like pedestry and lust murder (in ritual) were practiced, normal, accepted and ingrained into the social fabric. There is nothing inherently wrong with it. Governments of the future could make heterosexual relationships illegal for all I know... If people with your opinion are in charge the majority of us would get castrated and lobotomized.

 

 

The law may be subjective but an act of sexual harm is not. To the victim it is very real. I am of a liberal mind on most things but the limit must come when the will of the perpetrator is inflicted on the victim - that is sexual misconduct and inherently bad. The age of consent may vary with time and history but consent is what it is about. Lust murder in ritual! as normal - maybe to the Aztecs - but come on was it ever really ok?

[h.uriahr]

Apparently in US boot camp a drug is given so that morning erection/sex doesn't occur. I saw an interview with an actor who did an army movie. Prior to the movie, several of the actors were put through a mock boot camp with cooperation of the US military, and were given the drug. Trainees are under extreme stress during boot camp, and I assume the intent is to conserve their strength and disuade rape and relationships.

 

I still got morning wood and I was in the Navy. Boot camp in 2002

 

Law is subjective. Sex "offenders" are only offenders because society deems it so, not because of an objective standard. Society have existed in the past were things like pedestry and lust murder (in ritual) were practiced, normal, accepted and ingrained into the social fabric. There is nothing inherently wrong with it. Governments of the future could make heterosexual relationships illegal for all I know... If people with your opinion are in charge the majority of us would get castrated and lobotomized.

 

Way to include yourself in a group that forces their little dicks in women and children. Filthy, filty piece of shit

Edited November 4, 2008 by h.uriahr

[三江源]

 

Law is subjective. Sex "offenders" are only offenders because society deems it so, not because of an objective standard. Society have existed in the past were things like pedestry and lust murder (in ritual) were practiced, normal, accepted and ingrained into the social fabric. There is nothing inherently wrong with it. Governments of the future could make heterosexual relationships illegal for all I know... If people with your opinion are in charge the majority of us would get castrated and lobotomized.

 

It isnt an objective standard that deems such offences. It is humanity.

 

A developed sense of humanity.

[Anabhogya-Carya]

It isnt an objective standard that deems such offences. It is humanity.

 

A developed sense of humanity.

 

You assume that humanity is not subjective.

 

I still got morning wood and I was in the Navy. Boot camp in 2002

Way to include yourself in a group that forces their little dicks in women and children. Filthy, filty piece of shit

 

No where did I include myself in such a group. And bravo to a wonderful response....

 

The law may be subjective but an act of sexual harm is not. To the victim it is very real. I am of a liberal mind on most things but the limit must come when the will of the perpetrator is inflicted on the victim - that is sexual misconduct and inherently bad. The age of consent may vary with time and history but consent is what it is about. Lust murder in ritual! as normal - maybe to the Aztecs - but come on was it ever really ok?

 

The harm is based on the individual and what causes that harm changes throughout time. I do not condone rape or child molestation. But it is only a case of majority rule, one group placing the health and validity of their desires over another, the group in power that creates the system around these sexual preferences. It is the forcing against ones will that causes the harm (this could be anything outlawed in a system), it is not the sexual preference itself. Also be wary of with which eyes you are viewing something. And no, nothing is "inherently" bad. I challenge to prove inherit badness or define bad objectively.

[三江源]

 

You assume that humanity is not subjective.

 

I dont assume it. I experience it. I live it, what with being a taoist and all.

[Apech]

You assume that humanity is not subjective.

No where did I include myself in such a group. And bravo to a wonderful response....

The harm is based on the individual and what causes that harm changes throughout time. I do not condone rape or child molestation. But it is only a case of majority rule, one group placing the health and validity of their desires over another, the group in power that creates the system around these sexual preferences. It is the forcing against ones will that causes the harm (this could be anything outlawed in a system), it is not the sexual preference itself. Also be wary of with which eyes you are viewing something. And no, nothing is "inherently" bad. I challenge to prove inherit badness or define bad objectively.

 

 

I agree there is always a problem with moral absolutes. For instance would killing Hitler have been good or bad? But of course there is a chain of harm or the karma of harmful acts which probably makes Hitler a victim too. I would say harming others is always bad. Maybe if there is no intent or the person doing it is unable to understand the consequences of their acts then this might mitigate in terms of the punishment but it doesn't change the badness of the thing.

 

I am totally with you on state or culturally determined licensing of sexual activity. For instance gay sex is almost universally condemned in religions whose major works were written in ancient (and medieval) times (even Buddhism!) but most peoples view now is entirely different. This because the state (and organised religion) likes to control people and this perhaps is the essence because it is all about power over the other and the abuse of this power - the abuse of this power being 'harm'.

[Anabhogya-Carya]

I agree there is always a problem with moral absolutes. For instance would killing Hitler have been good or bad? But of course there is a chain of harm or the karma of harmful acts which probably makes Hitler a victim too. I would say harming others is always bad. Maybe if there is no intent or the person doing it is unable to understand the consequences of their acts then this might mitigate in terms of the punishment but it doesn't change the badness of the thing.

 

I am totally with you on state or culturally determined licensing of sexual activity. For instance gay sex is almost universally condemned in religions whose major works were written in ancient (and medieval) times (even Buddhism!) but most peoples view now is entirely different. This because the state (and organised religion) likes to control people and this perhaps is the essence because it is all about power over the other and the abuse of this power - the abuse of this power being 'harm'.

 

I agree with the second point. But I still do not think that there can be inate badness can be proven, or that it even exists at all. Naturally, we apply to word "bad" (or its ancient equivilent) to things that harm us and this may have been its origin, but over the course of history it was construed into an apparently independent standard used to classify many things outside the realm of actual harm (culturally relative things). Thus I think the idea of an independent standard of badness does not exist. This, of course is based on the idea of the possible absence of an ultimate, eternal deity, since things of the divine do not reside in the realm of rationalism or empiricism and cannot be proven. Of course all that I have said above is just as subjective as anything else.

 

 

I dont assume it. I experience it. I live it, what with being a taoist and all.

 

You have proved nothing. Your experiences are easily decieved.

Edited November 5, 2008 by Anabhogya-Carya

[Apech]

I agree with the second point. But I still do not think that there can be inate badness can be proven, or that it even exists at all. Naturally, we apply to word "bad" (or its ancient equivilent) to things that harm us and this may have been its origin, but over the course of history it was construed into an apparently independent standard used to classify many things outside the realm of actual harm (culturally relative things). Thus I think the idea of an independent standard of badness does not exist. This, of course is based on the idea of the possible absence of an ultimate, eternal deity, since things of the divine do not reside in the realm of rationalism or empiricism and cannot be proven. Of course all that I have said above is just as subjective as anything else.

 

 

 

Just to cross reference to the etymology thread I thought I better look up the word 'bad'.

 

From Origins by Eric Partridge I find:

 

ME bad, earlier badde: perh. (Webster) from OE baeddel, a hermaphrodite, cf OE baedling, an effeminate; but ? rather from C. *bados ... whence *bassos, the root being *bad, to be wide or open, the basic meaning of the adj. being 'wide open (to all influence, esp. the worst).

 

So it seems that bad either means effeminate or gullible. Not sure where this leaves us but it certainly seems to undermine the sense of just straightforward malevolent. And it does seem to lead towards a judgmental view i.e. I call bad anything which I deem to be not acceptable to me.

 

I await your learned opinion.

[Anabhogya-Carya]

Just to cross reference to the etymology thread I thought I better look up the word 'bad'.

 

From Origins by Eric Partridge I find:

 

ME bad, earlier badde: perh. (Webster) from OE baeddel, a hermaphrodite, cf OE baedling, an effeminate; but ? rather from C. *bados ... whence *bassos, the root being *bad, to be wide or open, the basic meaning of the adj. being 'wide open (to all influence, esp. the worst).

 

So it seems that bad either means effeminate or gullible. Not sure where this leaves us but it certainly seems to undermine the sense of just straightforward malevolent. And it does seem to lead towards a judgmental view i.e. I call bad anything which I deem to be not acceptable to me.

 

I await your learned opinion.

 

I do not think anyone can give a perfect definition of "bad," or "good" for that matter. And I did not know the orgins of bad had a connection to being effeminate, although some people still hold this connection today....

 

Calling bad anything unacceptable to the individual is how it is used in language, yet few relieze this. I guess the most important thing for everyone at upon that realization would be to considered why they find certain particulars bad and others not.

 

I like when discussion that are seemingly simple, like sex offense, turn into a epistomological debate

 

And on a lighter note; your cat looks very... wise. I presume that most cats are.