Convicted PEDOPHILE rapist!
Why do so many headlines leave that part out? I swear like half the headlines don’t feel that needs to be mentioned when it’s really a huge fucking part of the story.
if you’re genuinely curious: my bet is to avoid lawsuits. mind that people who use the word pedophile colloquially usually mean people who prey on children.
in reality, pedophilia is not a legal term and not a part of the crimes or charges. it’s a psychiatric disorder and in itself not the crime. laws are not concerned with the disorder so long as the person does not act on it.
on the legal side, crimes like statutory rape, child sexual abuse, or whatever it may be, are independent of the disorder and i would imagine a lot of people who engage in it might not have it; as sexual abuse is more often than not about power, not attraction.
so i imagine shit stain perpetrators like this can technically say they’re not pedophiles as they aren’t legally found to be so and sue for defamation. so media sticks to the legal terms.
that being said, even if they don’t use the word, they should mention that the victim was a 12 year old. so instead of pedophile rapist, it can say rapist of 12 year old. afaik that’s legally and technically true and shouldn’t be a legal liability.
disclaimer that these are opinions of a layman, and I’m not a lawyer.
“child rapist”
so legally they can call him a nonse
because he’s probably not a pedophile - I read somewhere that a lot of child rapists aren’t actually pedophiles. But it should say child rapist.
As a Dutch guy I feel compelled to apologize for our national olypic committee selecting and sending this douche nozzle to Paris.
He’s still going to be representing the team in the next competition. You guys need to make sure your government knows it’s not ok to send child groomer rapists onto the world stage to represent you. And his teammates seem to be ok with playing aside him again.
“If I can speak for him, after the match we lost, we were disappointed,” Immers said of his teammate Van de Velde. “But we said to each other: ‘Look what we did together. Look how hard we fought with all the attention.’ We stayed together. We cried together off the field and said, ‘OK, let’s just enjoy this moment.’ And we did that. So I’m happy we did it that way.”
Van de Velde and Immers will play together next in the European championships in the Netherlands right after the Olympics, and then the Dutch championships.
Sorry, but this is kind of fucked up. No offense to you personally, but my opinion of the Dutch just took a nosedive.
You dislike the Dutch now because their system of imprisonment is based on rehabilitation?
He was imprisoned by the UK, not the Dutch. The Dutch got him out of prison. After a year. For raping a 12-year-old multiple times.
He was first extradited by the Dutch and also imprisoned in the Netherlands (as is normal in international crimes). It’s not like they sprung him from a UK prison.
And exactly how long was he in prison in the Netherlands? For repeatedly raping a 12-year-old girl?
I totally agree with you and fuck this guy, but there is some context to his sentence here in the Netherlands:
One legal distinction is that Van de Velde is unlikely to have been convicted of rape had he stood trial in the Netherlands rather than England. In England, sex with a 12-year-old is rape, regardless of the circumstances: an under-16 cannot legally consent. But after he was extradited to the Netherlands, having serving almost a year of his prison sentence, he was released after less than a month. Under Dutch law, his crime was deemed to be the lesser offence of ontucht, sexual acts that violate social-ethical norms.
Oh I know. It’s disgusting, but it’s the law and you can’t retroactively change it. But they could, at the very least, not let the fucker on their Olympics team.
Nah, I hate them because their government sends known child rapists to other countries.
I hope you’re not from the US or the UK because I have some bad news for you…
I’m pretty sure he would be free to drive across Schengen borders to France in a few hours anyway. Having a criminal conviction doesn’t usually revoke the right to free travel.
Just how far will you go to defend child rapists?
Please point me to the words I posted in defence of his actions.
You seriously have a weird obsession with child rapists.
When did the conversation switch to the Vatican?
Do you think the Dutch prison system taught him not to travel internationally to give 12 year olds liquor so he could rape them? Do you think it did so in under a month?
I mean that is the idea of rehabilitation, yeah. I don’t know where you are getting “under a month” from. He was in prison for 13 months and was released on parole, which would probably also include some rehabilitation activities.
Apologies, I had read a source on lemmy saying he’d served 12 months of his sentence in England before being transferred back to the Netherlands, but I can’t confirm it at this time.
edit: Forbes and New York Times say he served a year in Britain and then had his sentence reduced upon repatriation.
And I know Britain didn’t prioritize his rehabilitation in any way.
That’s a very interesting piece of information actually, I didn’t see that anywhere else. Implies they didn’t agree with the UK verdict in the first place.
Implies they didn’t agree with the UK verdict in the first place.
Yep, hence everyone being upset that a child rapist was given a slap on the hand by their government and allowed to go to the Olympics. Makes the dutch look super fucking bad overall.
Removed by mod
It’s not even about whether he’s rehabilitated. Even if he never even thinks about molesting another kid he should be shunned and criticized and certainly never put on a global stage. Being rehabilitated doesn’t un-rape a kid.
He’s just a douche, playing a sport. I feel like the attribution of what a big honor this is falls kinda flat when nobody really cares about most athlethes, just the countries that take home the prizes.
And while we’re on this, and leaving the question of his rehabilitation aside, if you don’t believe someone who let’s presume has been changed by the justice system and would be a regular member of society going forward cannot be in the public eye, what’s even the point of going through the justice system to reform people?
The stain of past actions surely never goes anywhere, but if people can’t even go on to live a similar life to an innocent, why bother to claim we want to rehabilitate people at all? Serving 30 years in prison wouldn’t unmurder a person, why not just give the guy the chair and be done with it? Not like he can show his face in public or be considered for his abilities ever again, only for his past.
It’s easy to defend a rehabilitative system of justice when the crimes are petty, but one must defend it in equal measure when the crimes are grave, and even when, in my opinion in this case, it kind of misses. Sometimes bad guys get off too easy, but if they never commit such an act again, did the system not do its job?
if you don’t believe someone who let’s presume has been changed by the justice system and would be a regular member of society going forward cannot be in the public eye, what’s even the point of going through the justice system to reform people?
Being famous isn’t a fucking right people deserve. He’s free to get a regular job (E: one that does not give him direct and personal access to children and other vulnerable people, nor any power or influence) and earn a living like everyone else.
As for the point of going through the justice system to reform people - it’s so that they don’t rape children again, not so they can continue their lives exactly where they left off consequence free, and definitely not so that they can represent their country on a global stage.
You rapist apologists are fucking gross.
You didn’t answer my question. If they can’t go back to a normal life, what’s the point of rehabilitative justice? You don’t want them to offend again, sure, but how do you rehabilitate an individual if you bar them from participating in society?
If he’s free to get a regular job except for some jobs(one that isn’t even related to the crime, he didn’t rape someone while playing volleyball), then he’s just not free. If you want to treat former offenders as second class citizens, then you’re not doing rehabilitative justice.
I mean as much as you hate it, being an athlete is a pretty regular job, especially in smaller sports like volleyball. A volleyball player’s average salary is like 40k a year in the Netherlands, and you don’t really hear about a player unless you’re into the sport, so I really doubt the fame is as big of a factor as you make it out to be. The only reason he’s even this famous to begin with is the news story about the rape.
Your language in rife with disdain for this man and that’s fine, but you’re argumenting from a place of emotion, not reason. Worse even, you’re just not being honest with what you believe. Even if he was some random ass employee at some random ass establishment, people like you would hound him and try to get him fired for this because you ultimately don’t believe he should have a right to a normal life at all - and to pretend like you do but you’re just not okay with him doing this job is just a bald faced lie.
Also, way to strawman your interlocutor as a rape apologist. Go ahead and point out where in my responses I engaged in any rape apologia.
Maybe you should consider going back to your folks at X.
Lmfao, the site run by a rapist?? That’s your best comeback? 🤣🤣
if you don’t believe someone who let’s presume has been changed by the justice system and would be a regular member of society going forward cannot be in the public eye
That’s presuming a lot though.
Dude served 13 of his 48 months sentence (1/4). Of those 13 months, 12 were in England, and 1 was in the Netherlands before being released. How much reform did he get in 1 months? Enough to make up for repeatedly raping a pre-teen?
I don’t know about you, but I fucking doubt he’s changed if he’s not even publicly remorseful of his actions. I get the whole “served his time” argument, but that would require one to actually serve the time for the crime.
I said in my comment that the justice system probably missed in this case, but I’m not really interested in adjudicating whether it was right or wrong in its result. I’m starting with the premise of the system maybe having done its job, because a lot of people use the fact of the case to beat around the bush and not say what they really mean - that former criminals such as rapists shouldn’t see the light of day in society.
See to me, if one never ever commits a crime again after having previously commited a crime, regardless of the method used, it should be seen as a success. Focusing on the “did the time” is just advocating for punitive justice. You’re saying it’s not possible that he’s changed because he wasn’t punished enough, and should just be punished more regardless of the conclusion the system arrived at. But I wonder if more punishment would really change a person for the better.
The punitive justice system doesn’t care whether criminals do the crime again. It doesn’t matter if a rapist is unrepentant, they serve their 7-14 years or whatever and then they’re free again. In this, I don’t think it’s a more positive outcome than someone serving less time in prison. The punishment amount ultimately doesn’t necessarily serve a purpose other than inflicting harm on the guilty. You don’t believe he’s changed, but neither of us really knows, and we couldn’t really prove that he would change if he spent another 20 years in a cage.
But one thing we do know, based on a lot of research into human psychology and sociology is that if you treat a person like a monster, they tend to become monsters. The more you ostracize someone the fewer options they have, the more they’re pushed back towards being unable to live a normal, lawful life. The US has one of the most punitive justice systems and they have a recidivism rate of like 80% within 5 years of release. Over in incarceration systems like the Netherlands’, it’s about half of that.
There’s really no evidence to support the claim that more prison time = more well behaved citizens after, in fact all evidence pretty much points to the contrary. So I gotta wonder why people would advocate for it. And surely, in this case and other extreme cases, it is because of the crime. Whether he changed or not, whether he ever commits a crime again or not, whether he does feel remorse or not, let’s not kid ourselves that it would matter for most people.
Most of the people here wouldn’t feel differently if he had come out with an apology or something. It’s just a smokescreen for bloodsports, for wanting a bad man punished, not turned into a not-so-bad man. There is something innate in us screaming to have the ill elements of our society tortured, and it’s just an inherently reactionary impulse that we as a society need to work out of our system to actually create a better world instead of just perpetuating a neverending cycle of suffering.
And by all means, hate the guy, for sure. The boos are deserved and all, I’m not saying he shouldn’t catch any flack, but I don’t think kicking him off a sports team or sending him to jail for another couple of years will untraumatize that poor kid he raped, nor will it make him a better person.
I’m starting with the premise of the system maybe having done its job, because a lot of people use the fact of the case to beat around the bush and not say what they really mean - that former criminals such as rapists shouldn’t see the light of day in society.
I definitely don’t agree with the last point there, I’ve known plenty of violent criminals who have paid their time and were actually remorseful. This man has done neither, so I’m not willing to entertain that the system did it’s job. Especially when the system quartered the sentence of another nation for a violent crime against a minor.
You can call that punitive justice if you want, but arguing that If they never do another crime it’s successful just sounds like another way to say 'boys will be boys, they just made a small mistake". Especially with this argument:
I don’t think kicking him off a sports team or sending him to jail for another couple of years will untraumatize that poor kid he raped, nor will it make him a better person.
Sure, that’s all true. But I can’t imagine seeing her rapist allowed to play in the Olympics after getting a slap on the wrist isn’t going to not be re-traumatizing. It’s also not a good look for the Dutch, since it shows they care more about sports than they do their image or the suggestion that they’re light on child rapists.
He wasn’t even allowed to serve his full sentence and be rehabilitated. He was sent home from the UK after a year and the Dutch released him and claimed him rehabed. Meanwhile he refuses to show remorse, refuses to admit he did anything beyond a “mistake”. Also why didn’t he stay in the Olympics village? Cause there are kids there and he’s a child rapist and his own government knows it. If you’re so sure he’s rehabilitated, go all the way and show us you mean it and let him babysit your kids.
Going to the Olympics is a privilege not a right. You lose certain privileges forever when you rape kids.
This has nothing to do with the system.
His victim tried to self harm, and now she gets to see him living his best life at the olympics.
Where is the justice to his victim who gets to live a life of mental hell while he gets to be on TV?
There are plenty of things he could be doing with his life other than the olympics and torturing his victim all over again.
To be fair, seeing all the media coverage of him probably doesn’t help the girl he raped, either. It would be better for all involved parties that he just quietly retired from public life.
deleted by creator
Fellow embarrassed Dutch guy chiming in.
Edit: why did I get down voted for being an embarrassed Dutch guy? LOL, that’s what we are!
Lemmy works in mysterious ways. Have an Upvote from me (for what it’s worth).
Right back atcha, buddy!
Edit: even this was down voted. The Internet is a strange place.
That right there is more remorse than I’ve seen from the rapist himself…
Upon his release from prison, Van de Velde told a Dutch newspaper: “I have been branded as a sex monster, as a pedophile. That I am not—really not.”
I dunno, sounds like a ton of remorse /s
He actually prefers the term ephebophile and identifies as a libertarian.
I’m very conflicted about this whole thing. On the one hand, yeah it’s kind of a scandal and people have every right to be booing him every time he touches the ball.
On the other hand, he was convicted, sentenced, did time and is now back in society apparently showing remorse. People are calling for his career to end and various wishes of death on him. Why can’t he continue his life?
Are we supposed to lock up all criminals forever? Kill them? Just not allow them to follow their chosen career after getting out? Or is it just sports they shouldn’t be allowed to participate in?
apparently showing remorse
He showed no remorse. He called it nonsense. He said he made mistakes as a youth. He has not even bothered to offer anything in the way of an apology.
I also saw those statements on his wiki. Also saw some about it being “the worst mistake of his life”. I don’t imagine he would get parole without showing remorse.
You don’t imagine? Well then that proves it. He’s very sorry he raped a 12-year-old girl over and over even though he’s never said so in public.
deleted by creator
The “conservative mindset” that someone who raped a 12-year-old over and over should, at the very least, make a public apology before being allowed to join their Olympic team?
You’re right, that’s a total MAGA position. Trump 2024!
deleted by creator
Absolutely. We all know what big fans of public apologies MAGA people are.
And, of course, suggesting someone who raped a 12-year-old girl multiple times should make a public apology before being allowed on an Olympic volleyball team definitely means I don’t believe in governments.
It’s amazing how you’ve gotten me totally right so far.
No, the conservative mindset would be that she was married and wives can’t be raped.
Is that conservative mindset in the room with us right now?
He didn’t even serve his full sentence. You can’t call him reformed that way
deleted by creator
He did barely a year of prison… I personally don’t quite think it’s enough for raping a kid, but hey that’s just my opinion
Enough for what? Your sense of vengeance? I don’t know, only you can tell… Enough for rehabilitation? I don’t know, but it is possible. Time needed for rehabilitation varies widely. It’s quite possible the year was enough. One thing we do know is that the Netherlands is heavily in favour of rehabilitation over punishment, since rehabilitation actually forwards society
I am European and heavily against punitive justice. But I think one year of prison for a crime almost universally considered among the worst is not enough for rehabilitation, and I find this opinion validated by the lack of understanding or even remorse shown by the guy in public statements
This is exactly the point I’m trying to make, but am getting downvoted because I apparently sound like a “child rape apologist”.
I understand the crime is emotionally charged, but that doesn’t mean anyone convicted of it should just be thrown in the oubliette.
I would like to propose “forgettamatorium” as an English translation for oubliette.
I believe people can change and I think it’s important we hold space for people to do so. However, that hinges on the person actually growing, which often starts with showing remorse. I know you implied that this guy has done so, but I haven’t seen any evidence of that.
Even the quote you posted somewhere else about it being the worst thing he’d done, or something like that? That very much sounds like a, “I’m not sorry I did it, I’m sorry I got caught” kind of statement.
Asked if van de Velde had ever expressed any remorse to him for rape, Immers [his teammate] said: “No, he doesn’t, he doesn’t explain it.” (source)
“I have been branded as a sex monster, as a pedophile,” he said. "That I am not — really not.” (source)
If there’s an apology or some actual statement showing his remorse, I’d love to see it, but I’m skeptical that it exists. This whole controversy he’s had a huge opportunity to step up, apologize, and rebuke his prior actions. Instead, he’s faced it all with silence and a reaction of ‘I don’t want to talk about it.’ That is not the behavior of a person who acknowledges they were in the wrong, imo.
Seems like this whole debacle is because he didn’t make a press tour saying to the whole wide world how remorseful he is, but the comittee said that experts determined that he was remorseful though, so we shouldn’t trust the experts now?
Van de Velde has fully engaged with all requirements and has met all the stringent risk assessment thresholds, checks and due diligence. Experts have stated that there is no risk of recidivism.
Van de Velde has consistently remained transparent about the case which he refers to as the most significant misstep of his life. He deeply regrets the consequences of his actions for those involved. He has been open about the personal transformation he has undergone as a result. Since his return he has participated in major international events without incident.
The problem is that people absolutely believe that.
that doesn’t mean anyone convicted of it should just be thrown in the oubliette.
Yes it does. I think having empathy is a good thing and most people deserve it. Not child rapists.
So you’re for punitive justice instead of rehabilitive justice?
For pedophiles, yes!
child rapists or pedophiles? One is a crime another is a psychiatric disorder.
Less than half of child rapists are pedophiles.
Wow im being down voted for being a anti-pedo. Yall are fucking weird. And sick 🤮.
No you’re being downvoted for being in favor of barbaric punishments instead of rehabilitation.
Having a less cruel mindset is what allows it to go on though. Our justice system is built by predators for predators so victims are already at a disadvantage, and the fact that anyone would want consideration for the rapist only encourages others. The whole idea of being at all lenient on child rapists is crazy to me
This site is full of left wing fakers who blow their cover when it comes to stuff like this.
Your pretentious pseudo-enlightened bullshit pisses me of. No, not everyone here is out for vengeance. But there’s a middle ground between capital punishment and letting a child rapist go after only 13 months without them expressing remorse plus letting them represent their country at the Olympics. Travelling to another country to convince a 12 year old to have unprotected sex three times in two days, leading them to self-harm including an overdose is not “fornication”, it’s rape. This is not rehabilitation but a blatant failure of the Dutch justice system and society.
Plenty are though, just scroll up.
True, Breezy is just one example. But that’s not the ones they were discussing with.
I think a lot of users are just very young, and the light of idealism hasn’t left their eyes.
I agree, it seems like a small amount on the face of it.
But at the same time, I’m more inclined to trust the judgement of the prison system (at least in The Netherlands) as to whether he is ready to return to society.
It’s not the prison system of the Netherlands that you should be considering, It’s the legitimacy of the politicians that decided to release him. Clearly it was a political move do you believe that somebody else in his position would have been released so early?
Removed by mod
Nice slogan, but back in reality, there’s a phenomenon documented in psychology literature called Projection. It’s usually those who rabidly accuse others and calling for harsh punishments that are guilty of those same behaviours they are condemning.
Removed by mod
The irony
It is possible and encouraged to try and have empathy for even the worst of people.
Am I an islamic terrorist because I think the CIA shouldn’t torture the 9/11 planners for two decades?
Torture isn’t imprisonment though. One of them is an established method of punishment for actual criminals and the other one is just pointless.
Also the US has the death penalty so you know I suppose it’s proportionate by their standards.
It seems like a lot of criminals who “did their time” really didn’t do much at all.
Compare that to a lifetime of hurt caused to the victim(s) and their families, and it just doesn’t seem good enough.
While I agree this seems extremely small. The netherlands is not the US. The specifics of court cases are not made public. We have no idea about them. It might be a very ambiguous case that barely fit the definition of rape or whatever.
Not trying to defend rape or rapists, but we may need more context before we can judge the length of a sentence.
Edit: I just read a less opinionated in depth article on him, and from the details I see, man he fucked up bad, in my opinion he deserved more than 13 months. He got sentenced to 4 years at first but that got cut short.
It’s a good thing the court of public opinion still has a voice and doesn’t approve of child rapists quite so heartily as the Dutch government. What “time” did he do - like 11months? And he was never remorseful in the slightest. If his only real punishment is going to be him and his country getting booed by the world at the Olympics, I’m happy there’s at least that.
did time and is now back in society apparently showing remorse.
Nope, neither of those.
What do you mean? He served 13 months and got out on parole. He’s publicly expressed remorse, but that isn’t exactly conclusive. I assume there would have been some genuine remorse inside, otherwise there would be no parole.
My point is, if you stop anyone who has been to jail returning to normal society at all, then why let them out at all? You might as well just put every criminal in jail for life, or just kill them straight away.
deleted by creator
Did you consider that the Netherlands thinks its important to stand by its rule of reform over punishment? You are being incredibly vague as well with what the person deserves.
Say it plainly, what should have been done instead?
You might as well just put every criminal in jail for life, or just kill them straight away.
Just the child rapists is fine with me. There’s no reforming that.
“I can’t reverse it, so I have to carry the consequences. It’s the biggest mistake of my life.”
Source: The article linked in the OP
If that’s not remorse, I don’t know what is.
Never apologiest and he only ever talks about how it is bad for him. Remorse it is not.
Remorse: “I am sorry for what I did and the impact it had on the victim. I made stupid choices that hurt another person, and while I can never take that back, I will seek to do better so no one needs to suffer from my actions again.”
Not sorry you did it, just sorry you got caught: “I can’t reverse it, so I have to carry the consequences. It’s the biggest mistake of my life.”
On the other hand, he was convicted, sentenced, did time and is now back in society apparently showing remorse.
He hardly did any time at all. Frankly you do more time for a parking ticket. Also when did he show remorse like whenever has he ever shown any remorse at all?
he can continue his life, but get the fuck out of public positions like this if youre a fucking pedo rapist
How about “not put them representing your country, where other people might understand that as an endorsement as see him as a role model”.
There is shades of grey between “killing him” and “send him to the Olympics”.
I agree with you pretty much on all points.
I am also conflicted.
It’s up to courts and parole boards to determine what punishments are appropriate, given the context of the crimes.
I don’t like the guy, and of course his crime was repugnant, but I can still acknowledge that he’s one of the best volleyball players in the world. These two opinions are incongruous and yet, they exist at the same time.
My thought is more along the lines of, “Regardless of his talent level, is this really the kind of person that his country wants representing them on the world stage?”
Like, okay even if he’s the absolute best by an order of magnitude…if he were from my country, I’d rather lose every match than win on the talents of someone like that.
For me, there’s a difference between rehabilitation and letting someone represent your country at the olympics. Athletes don’t have to be perfect but to a certain extent they are ambassadors of their country and role models.
This paired with him not staying in prison for long because the Dutch legal system is fucking abysmal is reason enough for me to celebrate that he’s out.
I’m not conflicted. I’m not saying he should be in jail forever. But I’m also saying it’s clear that he shouldn’t be representing his country on the world stage. That’s a privilege you should lose forever when you rape a child. Cause remember, going to the Olympics is a privilege, not a right. It’s like yeah he served your time, would you let him babysit your daughter now then? Or let him hang out at schools? You gotta forgive, but you’re stupid if you forget
There’s a system in place for that. It’s called ‘verklaring omtrent gedrag’. For many jobs and positions you need this certificate of conduct in order to apply. The ministry of justice will not hand out the certificate if your crime is related to the position you apply for. This means he would probably never be allowed to work at a school for instance.
First of all, not all crimes are the same nor should be treated equally.
Secondly, he raped a 12 year old, and that’s unredeemable in a lot of people’s book.
That doesn’t answer their question though. Those people don’t have to be friends with the guy, but wishing him death or homelessness etc is not only horrible but solves nothing other than making them feel like they’re “better”.
On the other hand, he was convicted, sentenced, did time and is now back in society apparently showing remorse.
He flew to England, raped a 12 yo, got convicted by the English for 4 years. He was deported back to Netherlands, they dropped it to 1 year.
This isn’t justice.
It’s simple really.
His judgement, sentencing and punishment satisfy the needs of the law. the law has done it’s part (arguably terribly in this case) and is at rest.
This is vastly different than the judgement bright forth by the court of public opinion. They are not so forgiving.
Perhaps that’s something the dude should have thought about before doing what he did
Why can’t he continue his life?
Because he raped a child. The only olympic event he should have been allowed to participate in was competitive shooting, as a target.
Let’s do politicians next.
Fucking finally. Price of shit rapist. Maybe the Dutch will reform their legal system in-time for the next Olympics?
Im not sure if any legal system would say a felon cant join the olympics. Unless you mean having draconian punishments like the US. Then no, I hope they dont damage their legal system to become that corrupt.
He got 13 months for rape and only one of those months was actually their choice the other 12 was the UK government’s choice. Essentially they thought that one month of imprisonment for rape was acceptable.
They clearly need some change.
The Dutch need a metric fuckton of cultural reform. I’m saying this as a descendant of them in Canada.
Blackface is not an acceptable holiday tradition, and marzipan is concentrated evil. Also fuuuuuuuuck rapists, you get nothing, you fucking LOSE, and you goddamn keep losing as an example to any other idiots, good day sir!
As a woman who has been victim to sexual violence, I fear over punishment of rape because if their life can’t get worse there’s no incentive not to murder their victims. He got off too easily for certain, but the goals of Justice should be to protect the victim and ensure the perpetrators don’t do it again as well as to disincentivize those who may commit such crimes with the least amount of harm done to achieve this.
One month sounds like far too little, but “your life is over” means even if they don’t kill their victim victims and police are both less likely to act on legitimate cases. Most rapes are from someone the victim knows and trusts.
That said the team definitely should’ve chosen to not accept him on it.
Nuance has entered the discussion
First of all, sorry this happened to you and thank you for your perspective on this.
There’s a lot of possible middle ways between 13 months and life’s over, though. I’m a strong believer in rehabilitation but there are some necessities, e.g. a sufficient level of remorse which he has not shown as far as I can tell, and basically zero chance of repetition, which to be fair seemingly is the case.
There are some things in my opinion that you should never be able to do as a convicted child rapist even after rehabilitation which includes being a primary care taker of children and representing your country at the Olympics.
Thank you for pointing this out. As another who believes in rehabilitation, this whole situation made me really uncomfortable. I never wanted to defend the asshole, I just hate the way we view criminals on a large scale.
e.g. a sufficient level of remorse which he has not shown as far as I can tell, and basically zero chance of repetition, which to be fair seemingly is the case.
It literally is the case: https://time.com/7004041/convicted-rapist-competing-olympics-steven-van-de-velde/
But most people basically want the return of the death sentence without directly killing someone, they just want to take their living and put them under a bridge.
Is that remorse here in the room with us?
Just to make clear what I mean:
he said it’s the biggest mistake of his life - I sure fucking hope so. This is an empty statement, of course it is.
and he has to bear the consequences - that’s what grinds my gears. No, he doesn’t bear the consequences, his victim does. I would like for him just once to acknowledge that there is an actual victim here and it’s not him. He destroyed her life. Even that carefully crafted PR statement you posted here only ominously mentioned “those involved”. He doesn’t mention her, his organization doesn’t mention her. He calls it a misstep and a mistake, he doesn’t call it what it is, child rape.
If he were truly reformed, he would acknowledge what kind of pain his continuous presence in the public eye inflicts on his victim and others like her and would actually bear the consequences - step down on his own.
Thank you for a level response. In the U.S. especially there are fear and anger knees jerks to some situations where a calm response is an absolute necessity. As always, there is more nuance than there appears.
Yeah one of the common ways victims are dismissed by the police is by asking “do you really want to ruin their life over this”. Now this man repeatedly engaged in statutory rape of an underage individual as I’ve heard, he definitely deserves to be punished more, but also even the guilty and unrepentant deserve a fair hand administering their punishment. But even if they didn’t, that’s the same hand that will punish the repentant and the falsely convicted. The three cannot be separated completely and so we must strive for what we can be comfortable with all three enduring
“do you really want to ruin their life over this"
The problem with this statement here is that the responsibility is shifted to the victim. The victim didn’t mess up the rapist’s life, the rapist did. But this is not an issue of too harsh sentences of rapists but of awful training of police officers.
Blackface is an American sensitivity, not Dutch. And there’s plenty of Dutch people as it is that are pushing for it to be changed because it’s seen as offensive to other countries, so there’s also that.
It’s not offensive to a country. It’s offensive to a group of people, particularly dark-skinned people. It is a form of mockery. Unless you’re trying to tell me that the Dutch people who partake in blackface aren’t doing it to mock black and dark skin people. If that’s the case, please educate me
Here’s a summation from another dutch poster @ClamDrinker@lemmy.world a while back:
I’m sorry, but this is just really kind of disingenuous to start something like this next to a topic such as this. Your experience with one company or something is purely anecdotal and the controversy around Zwarte Piet is also very nuanced to this very day. The kind of nuance someone not from here will not get from a casual google search. For anyone that cares about actually understanding, here’s a rundown:
Many people attributed Zwarte Piet as a fun and good role model for kids, not some kind of caricature clown to laugh at. Literally almost everyone grew up knowing and having a fond enjoyment of Zwarte Piet, like a childhood imaginary friend that always showed up when you needed a smile the most. And that creates a strong desire to set that positivity forth by continuing the tradition. It takes really good reasons to destroy something most people attribute to be part of the greater good of their lives.
We try to understand racism, and strive to effectively reduce it rather than just mindlessly treat symptoms. Many people saw the existence of Zwarte Piet as a way to instill positive experiences to kids who might be isolated from having positive experiences with actual people of color. We know that in part racism comes about from not having enough (or too many bad) real world experiences with people of different skin colors. It is a type of fear of the unknown. As such, this still seems like solid reasoning. (Fun note, rats will also not help other stranger rats with a different fur color to escape even with no direct harm to themselves except when they have already lived alongside aside a rat with that fur color)
Even people of color were not completely on one side, but for the ones that it hurt, it hurt loudly. Black people in the Caribbean (Also part of the Netherlands) still use Zwarte Piet to this day, because they do not care - They do not see the racism in it. Unfortunately there seems to be a correlation between being affected by racism and seeing the racism in Zwarte Piet, as many of us learned as the conversation marched on. And racists definitely did wield Zwarte Piet to make their racism be known. In a world without racism, Zwarte Piet would not be controversial. And many people were not acutely aware of the racism some people of color faced.
The majority has wanted to get rid of it (since about 2018, actually), and most places have more accepted solutions in place now. But this does not mean that many people agree because we think Zwarte Piet is actually inherently racist. It’s because we’ve heard the concerns of people of color and weighed their burden to be more important to relieve than the perceived benefit of tradition and instilling a positive message on people that look different from yourself. It also didn’t help that the vast majority of people that still wanted to overrule those concerns were pretty obviously racist, which pushed even more people over the edge, because we don’t want to hold traditions in place that shield racists and bigots. Some countries could really learn from that.
Blackface is an American sensitivity, not Dutch
Yeah that’s just not true.
What was their reasoning for not punishing the guy? I haven’t heard about that yet. And frankly a year for rape also sounds anomalous
Under Dutch law, pressuring a 12 year old into having sex repeatedly (3 times in 2 days) is fornication, not rape. Not making this up, that’s actually their reasoning.
To be fair, of course Durch authorities did not ignore that he was in prison in the UK, so they did not say one month is enough, but 13 months.
How tf?! Thank you for the information, this is somehow even dumber than I thought
To be clear. I’m not defending a rapist. There is some nuance though. The guy was 19 and she said she was 16. They’d been chatting for months, and he flew to the UK for her, believing they were in some sort of relationship. He found out her true age after this.
Was he being naive thinking it’d be alright. Oh yes. Is it still wrong? Definitely. Should be have been punished? Yep.
Is he a pedophile because he had sex with a girl he was in love with and should he be punished for the rest of his life? You tell me.
That’s wrong, he knew she was twelve before he went to the UK. Don’t make shit up.
He found out her true age after this.
He knew before he raped her:
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-35861441Judge Francis Sheridan said: "You were a potential Olympian. You had the possibility of a stellar future representing the Netherlands.
“She was a child aged 12. You were fully aware of that fact.”
I think having a child rapist not be in the Olympics isn’t draconian. The Dutch sound a little too lax with their “formication” laws
People seem to be more outraged that a rapist is allowed to play sportsball than rapists being allowed to become president.
only if booing was able to remove pedophile and rapist politicians from power too
I mean, using your voice to influence the outcome of politics is kind of how a democracy works. Ideally, at least. But I agree with your sentiment.
Also, for a second I imagined a scenario where voting is done by small groups in booths, booing for the politicians they don’t like and clapping for the ones they like, and then someone would watch the tapes and just count how many people booed and clapped at every politician.
except a single billionaire has more effect on the outcome of an election than probably hundreds of thousands of normal income citizens
except a single billionaire has more effect on the outcome of an election than probably hundreds of thousands of normal income citizens voting
FTFY
Start with organizing, protesting, and striking. Continue escalating as needed until they bend to our will. Voting is a compromise that we accepted instead of a revolution.
He’s only 29, this is gonna haunt him for a LONG LONG time.
It might even ruin his chances for getting to the Olympics and representing his country on the world stage.
We can only hope so.
It literally hasn’t, I suspect that reply is mocking yours for thinking, despite all evidence pointing to the contrary, that him raping a child would stop him from doing anything at all because we live in rape culture and rapists hardly ever pay any real price or suffer any serious consequences for their abhorrent actions.
Hoping for it, isn’t going to change reality - facing the fucked up reality and calling it out, might.
Not necessarily, fingers crossed.
Not if he stayed home and got a job and lived his life. But being on the world stage and representing your country is a choice and a privilege. It’s not owed to him. He can fuck off to obscurity any time he wants
Every time a rapist is sad or something bad happens to them, I smile. The worse the event, the happier I am. Death should be their only release from torture. I accept no less and grant no pity, no matter how bad it gets for them.
And it goes double for Trump.
I agree with your sentiment, but nobody deserves torture, no matter how terrible they are or what they’ve done. I can totally accept an argument that society is better without some people in it, but torture isn’t good for anyone, ever, and we should never, ever endorse its use, even when speaking figuratively.
If our goal is to minimize suffering for everyone, intentionally inflicting needless suffering on others is antithetical to that goal, and makes us no better than those we oppose.
How is there no mechanism to remove him? I mean, ideally he shouldn’t have been selected in the first place but under the insanely charitable assumption that it was sloppiness and not active negligence that recruited him.
It’s not the Olympic organizers’ job to disqualify someone based on how immoral, criminal, of poor character or despicable a person is (on who’s laws anyway?). This is a major failure on the country’s olympic committee selecting these people to represent themselves to the world.
Yet they’re more than happy to disqualify and otherwise exclude people based on their biology. Curious… 🤔
On the one hand that’s supposedly to do with competitive advantage. It makes sense to try to even the playing field, which should have nothing to do with objection on ‘moral’grounds. I’d argue this is mostly a good thing given the iffiness of many groups’ morals.
Case in point, your exact examples, which brings me to the other hand. Banning trans athletes on ‘fairness’ grounds is bullshit. In most sports there’s no known competitive advantage. Where there’s an imbalance they tend to show disadvantage. The rare cases with an advantage for trans athletes tend to disappear the moment you correct for size/weight, which is not something we’d exclude cis athletes for. None of your examples should have happened. They do not hold water on fairness grounds, and any moralistic reasons behind it are reprehensible.
Who have they disqualified?
Transgender and intersex athletes.
https://www.insidethegames.biz/articles/1143198/restrictions-transgender-paris2024-games
https://www.vox.com/culture/364032/trans-athletes-olympics-2024
https://www.thenation.com/article/society/trans-athletes-paris-olympics/
https://www.leidenlawblog.nl/articles/are-transgender-and-intersex-athletes-banned-from-the-olympics
Cool, thanks for sharing. I know that the criteria is sketchy at best, but interesting to see where the line is drawn, and how this is still a “problem” that the IOC are facing.
Damn, maybe cis women should git gud instead of being scared of trans folk.
It’s almost like you would have a physical advantage by being born male. See no issues with transwomen competing with men though. Technically the mens divisions are the “unrestricted” entries.
Pretty interesting read, but far from conclusive. As they said in the study. 15-23 random people from each group gathered from social media isn’t exactly what I would call bulletproof. Just by going through male puberty you would have a physical advantage by being taller.
Obviously it’s a murky subject on the topic of intersex and transgender athletes participating in the ladies’ competition. However on the whole, the focus is on matters related to achieving a fair competition to a sport rather than someone’s morality. The IOC, with consultation from a multitude of countries, dropped many of the testosterone and sex testing criteria for this year, where before the 2016 olympics, trans and intersex athletes were barred completely without genital surgery.
Sure, but how did they end up selecting him and why can’t they recall him?
That is a very good question and quite shameful for the Dutch Olympic Committee that they did not.
On what grounds would he be removed though? Is there a reason countries shouldn’t select athletes that have been to prison?
On the grounds that the Olympic Games is mostly a propaganda event and he’s absolutely terrible propaganda?
Well on that same vein, the IOC unilaterally disqualifying a country’s chosen athlete is likely to be even more politically problematic.
All Olympic athletes sign a declaration saying they’ll strive to be a role model or something similar. I’d say a convicted rapist shouldn’t be considered a role model and therefore shouldn’t be allowed to compete.
I get your point, but a convicted criminal who is rehabilitated could also be considered a good role model. Not saying he is, but not really a means to disqualify him.
Yeah, I thought the same when I wrote the comment. I’ve read a bit more about him and what he was charged with. In the UK he wasn’t convicted of grooming - they prosecuted him for it but he was found not guilty. I think it was a consensual relationship, but of course a 19 year old having sex with a 12 year old is rape regardless of consent in the UK and he was (rightly) convicted of that. In the Netherlands however the law is different, it wasn’t considered rape but something like “morally offensive actions”. So from the Dutch pov he’s not actually a rapist, which might explain why the Dutch Olympic committee don’t seem to think it’s that big a deal. Despite that, I still think a convicted pedophile rapist should not be allowed to compete in the games, but that needs to be made clear in the eligibility requirements by the IOC, rather than the wishy-washy “role model” contract.
The fact that he’s a fucking child rapist. No need to be an apologist for the pedophile, he’s a shit person and it’s ok to call him that.
Yeah but that’s not really what my question was about.
Why shouldn’t the Dutch delegation select him? And what rules would prevent a selection of any convicted criminal?
Or are we talking about the IOC specifically banning people convicted of child rape offences?
Why shouldn’t the Dutch delegation select him? And what rules would prevent a selection of any convicted criminal?
Olympic athletes are representatives of their home country. Why the fuck would you pick a child rapist to be your representative? Were the cannibals unavailable or something?
Because olypians aren’t chosen based on the morality of their character but how much they excell at their sport (just like most major sports)
“We’re totally fine being represented by rapists because we wanna win, godammit.”
Isn’t volleyball a team sport? How are his teammates okay with being on a team with a child molester? How are his opponents okay with playing in a game against him? Even if there’s no official mechanism, couldn’t all the players just be like “Nah, fuck that, he goes or I do”. The only time I’ve every knowingly ran into one I couldn’t have been civil towards them if I wanted to let alone actually work together on something.
The olympics have athletes competing from countries where being gay is a crime, like the girl from Algeria, it’s not on them to be the world police.
Sad. Hope he doesn’t fall into a wheat thresher on his way to the loser’s bunks.
ELIMINATED
That would be a shame. Threshers aren’t designed to grind up trash and it might cost the owner a bit in maintenance
Good for the crowd.
yay!
I’m on the fence on that. He raped a minor which is not excusable, he possibly ruined her life. How can a person like that be redeemed? Or does he not deserve redemption? He was 19. When I was 19, I was an irresponsible child. There is no proof that he is a pedophile.
Dunno about you, but when I was 19 the thought of raping a child never crossed my mind. He’s spent less than a year in prison, and hasn’t repented for what he did. Redemption has to at the very least come with an understanding that what he did was wrong.
Edit: slightly more than a year; 13 months
I bet “raping a child” did neither cross his mind, when he did it.
He groomed the child for YEARS before he raped her. It’s wild you’re defending this
Edit: I can’t find the article I thought I read about him first meeting the child when they were 10
Didn’t know that
Sorry I could be wrong, can’t find the article that said the girl was 10 when they met online
There’s a pretty obvious difference between a kid who’s 12, and someone you could reasonably mistake for being an adult (UK age of consent is 16).
He’s spent more than a year in prison.
Also, we can’t take his words for gospel, but atleast he acts as if he’s repented:
“I can’t reverse it, so I have to carry the consequences. It’s the biggest mistake of my life.”
Yes, a whole 13 months. What a punishment for raping a 12-year-old girl over and over.
And that isn’t repenting. Repenting includes an apology for what he did.
He did it multiple times? 🤢
And yes, I agree, 13 months seems way too short. I was correcting the comment above which said less than one year. It’s good also to take into account that prison doesn’t just “end”. There’s a lengthy parole and rehabilitation process after, and your movements and activities are strictly restricted while on parole.
Sadly, yes. I read about what he did and I’m sorry I read about it.
Bro she was like 12. I was also an irresponsible child at 19, but I wasn’t raping 12 year olds, nor did it cross my mind.
Playing devil’s advocate on pedophilia is not it.
You should check the definition of pedophilia.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Actually I said the following:
If you see a meaningful difference between pedophelia and ephebophilia you’re probably a kiddie fucker. Especially if you’re trying to use that definition to cover someone’s who’s only fucking 12.
Whether or not fucking a 12 year old isn’t pedophilia or ephebophilia it doesn’t matter.
If you, as an adult, fuck a 12 year old, then you are in fact still a kiddy fucker. Subscribing to dictionary.com’s word of the day won’t change that. It doesn’t matter, and its still just as creepy lmao. Why is that so hard to understand?
Nuance doesn’t mean waiving away whatever immoral shit you want just because you can justify it to yourself.
Well actually-ing pedophilia is not a good look.
he raped a minor
no proof that he’s a pedophile
Are you stupid?
The majority of child molesters are not pedophiles. It is more about power dynamics / them being an easy target.
Did you know most child rapists don’t fit pedophilia diagnostic critia?
Edit: I read an article on him and he has a 2 year old son. I really hope he isn’t a pedophile.
If you go by medical definition, that would be hebephilia. Pedophilia is only used with children younger than 11.
The reason in this case could also have been because she was an easy target, the age must not necessarily be the reason.
Repeatedly telling people he’s not technically a pedophile is really not in any way helpful. He raped a 12-year-old multiple times. Who is it hurting to call him a pedophile?
Why do you need to call him something if it’s inaccurate? Just call him a child rapist and be done with it. Words have meanings and there is no reason to use them incorrectly.
As for who it’s hurting: everyone. Pedophila literally has nothing to do with rape. It is a disorder. It’s estimated it effects as much as 3% of the population. The vast majority of those people have never done anything wrong. They were simply born that way. The more people conflate the medical term with crimes the less likely pedophiles are going to seek help or treatment. Nobody wants to risk being outed as part of the most hated group of people on the planet.
If you want to actually help children instead of being angry the best course of action is to destigmatize the disorder so people can get counseling without fear of ruining their lives. Forcing people to bottle up their feelings/urges/etc. does not lead to good outcomes.
Do you think maybe medical terms and terms that the general public use aren’t always the same? Like you know when someone says “I broke my toe” and they just fractured it, people are fine with them saying that even though it wouldn’t medically be considered broken, yes?
Similarly, if someone says “I’m feeling depressed today,” do you think most people assume they have clinical depression? I sure wouldn’t.
And sorry, you are not going to destigmatize pedophilia by doing an “umm… actually” every time a child rapist is called a pedophile.
Only because people like you refuse to change. That’s a self-fulfilling prophecy.
I don’t understand why you want to be wrong so badly. What do you even gain from that? In this case using the wrong word isn’t even just wrong it’s objectively harmful but for some reason you want to keep doing it anyway? Why?
People like me? Refuse to change? I didn’t call him a pedophile.
I’m saying read the room.
Real talk: constantly conflating child rapists with pedophiles is actually a problem. Pedophiles didn’t choose their sexuality, however coming out would destroy their lifes because of how society sees them, so they don’t. Which means they don’t seek help which increases the risk of them acting on it at some point in their life. Even if you feel no sympathy towards them, which I get, them getting treatment is important to reduce cases of child abuse.
I was stupid at 19 too, but for me that meant letting my at-the-time boyfriend finish inside even though I didn’t know him nearly well enough. Turned out he was slutting out it with randos and never got tested before our relationship. That’s around the stupid I expect at 19.
Rape is a bit fucking beyond that, don’t you think?
No. People who don’t even bother offering anything in the way of apology for their atrocities do not deserve redemption.
Get help before you hurt someone.
Removed by mod
The fact that your reply has fewer points than that rape apologist’s is infuriating, wtf is wrong with people??
Hi, friend. I’m sure you have well-meaning intentions by making this comment. As someone who was a survivor of a similar situation such as this, and who also grew into a 19 year old, I can tell you that from a non-clinical perspective, if you are attracted to a child of early puberty age as a 19 year old adult, I don’t think making this assumption is too far off the table. I’m sick and tired of coming on here and listening to this discourse about this volleyball player. Thank you for your two sides to every story, attempt at nuance and empathy for a rapist here. As a survivor of CSA, this has never been granted to me or anyone else I know of that has survived something like this. We need a different reaction to people who do these acts to innocent children.
There is no proof that he is a pedophile.
Not entirely sure where you’re going with this. He’s not an irredeemable asshole because he might be a pedophile, he’s an irredeemable asshole because he raped a child and that’s indisputable.
Daily Beast - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for Daily Beast:
MBFC: Left - Credibility: Medium - Factual Reporting: Mixed - United States of America
Wikipedia about this sourceTheres a typo in the article where they refer to him as “Ban de Velde” which is hilariously appropriate
