Talk back: Can clinicians help pedophiles quell their desires?

If a person harbors a lifelong attraction to a child, is there a solution? Can clinicians and other media campaigns help pedophiles recognize and accept their feelings?

Researchers are taking a new look at the origins of pedophilia, with many experts now looking at it as a sexual orientation that shows up during puberty, rather than a result of childhood psychological influences.

In the laboratory, researchers finding out new information about pedophilia, which is a dominant attraction to prepubescent children.

Research shows that 1% to 5% of men are pedophiles, and about 30% of pedophiles are left-handed or ambidextrous -– triple the general rate.

They are also nearly an inch shorter on average and lag behind the average IQ by 10 points.

Many clinicians are giving up on changing the sexual orientation of pedophiles, instead opting to teach them how to resist their unacceptable desires.

From Times reporter Alan Zarembo’s article:

Experts believe that pedophiles who also have a significant attraction to adults stand the best chance of staying out of trouble, because of their capacity for some sexual fulfillment that is legal.

For others, injections of hormones to reduce sex drive are often recommended. Most pedophiles, however, don't receive any attention until they've been arrested. In an attempt to change that, sex researchers in Germany launched an unusual media campaign in 2005.

"You are not guilty because of your sexual desire, but you are responsible for your sexual behavior," said billboards urging them to contact the Institute of Sexology and Sexual Medicine in Berlin. "There is help! Don't become an offender!"

More than 1,700 men have responded to the print, television and online ads for Project Dunkelfeld — literally "dark field."

As of August, 80 had completed a one-year program aimed at teaching them to control their impulses. Some received hormone shots. Compared to men still on the waiting list, those who received treatment were deemed less likely to molest children, according to an analysis of risk factors.

What do you think of this research? Can new research help pedophiles stay out of trouble? 

Let us know in the comments section, on our Local Facebook page or by tweeting @LANow.

ALSO:

 L.A. Now Live: Crenshaw High to be converted to magnets

DMV report adds to debate on licenses for illegal immigrants

Judge to consider dismissing charges against anti-gang activist

Overturned rape conviction: Time for laws to be updated? [Talk back]

Is a man who enters a sleeping woman's dark bedroom and tricks her into having sex by impersonating her boyfriend guilty of rape? According to a state appeals court, no. But if she had been a married woman? Yes. 

The reluctant 2nd District Court of Appeal unanimously overturned the rape conviction of Julio Morales, who entered a sleeping woman's dark bedroom, after her boyfriend walked out, and began having intercourse with her. The woman screamed and resisted when she awoke and realized Morales was not her boyfriend, the court said.

The appeals court relied on a criminal code enacted in 1872 that defined rape as an act of sexual intercourse "with a female not the wife of the perpetrator."

The law was amended a couple of years later to specify that such sex would be rape if the victim "submits, under the belief that the person committing the act is her husband, and this belief is induced by any artifice, pretense, or concealment practiced by the accused."

"We reluctantly hold that a person who accomplishes sexual intercourse by impersonating someone other than a married victim's spouse is not guilty of the crime of rape of an unconscious person," the decision said.

From Times reporter Maura Dolan's Friday article: 

The court urged the Legislature to change the archaic law to "correct the incongruity that exists when a man may commit rape … when impersonating a husband, but not when impersonating a boyfriend."

The justices noted that prosecutors advanced two legal theories — that the defendant raped by tricking the victim, which applies only to married women, and that he committed rape by having sex with a sleeping person.

Because it was unclear under which theory the jury convicted Morales, the court overturned the conviction. If Los Angeles prosecutors retry Morales, they may prevail only under the sleeping person theory and only if they prove Morales knew the woman was sleeping when he had sex with her, the court said.

What do you think of the court's ruling? Is it time for the Legislature to update the laws on the books? Let us know in the comments section, on our Local Facebook page or by tweeting @LANow.

ALSO:

Rain headed to Los Angeles area on Sunday

Justin Bieber's call for paparazzi curbs generates debate

Voiding of rape conviction involving sleeping woman called 'bizarr

--Maura Dolan and Samantha Schaefer

Does gay conversion therapy ban violate free speech? [Talk back]

A new ban on gay conversion therapy in California, the first of its kind in the nation, has divided lower courts and legal scholars on whether the law violates free speech rights.

The law would prohibit doctors and therapists from trying to change a minor's sexual orientation. The law is now before the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, which could decide in the next several days whether to put the law on hold before it takes effect Jan. 1. A ruling could take months.

UC Berkeley constitutional law scholar Jesse Choper said the law faces "a steep uphill battle" on free speech grounds.

"It is very hard to silence speech generally," Choper said.

But UC Irvine Law School Dean Erwin Chemerinsky said the law was constitutional because it banned an ineffective and harmful therapy.

Communications between professionals and their clients generally have less 1st Amendment protection than other forms of speech. A lawyer or doctor who negligently gives bad advice may be found liable for malpractice, and licensing requirements for professionals may be restrictive.

"The fact that it is speech doesn't immunize it from liability or punishment," Chemerinsky said.

U.S. District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller, ruling for the state, said the law prohibits a form of conduct — therapy that uses pain or discomfort to combat sexual arousal and efforts to alter thought patterns, including hypnosis.

"Plaintiffs in this case do not have a fundamental right to receive a therapy that California has deemed harmful and ineffective," Mueller wrote.

UC dumps hated logo; should it stick with tradition? [Talk back]

In response to mockery, memes and an online petition, University of California officials announced Friday they are suspending further use of a new logo. The symbol has already disappeared from some university websites.

But with the hated logo gone, what's next? Should officials try again or stick with the traditional seal?

University officials defended the new design but emphasized the importance of listening to UC constituents.

"While I believe the design element in question would win wide acceptance over time, it also is important that we listen to and respect what has been a significant negative response by students, alumni and other members of our community," Daniel M. Dooley, UC's senior vice president for external relations, said in a statement Friday morning.

Foes started an online petition and complained that the graphic -- a large U containing a fading C at the bottom -- was demeaning to the university. They lobbied for UC to fully restore the use of its traditional seal, with its "Let There Be Light" motto, a drawing of an open book and the 1868 date of UC's founding.

Dooley said use of the new graphic will be end, although he noted that it might take time to complete its removal from all documents and online pages.

As the news broke, students and alumni on social media celebrated the demise of the new logo.

"So glad the new UC logo is history. Definitely a marketing blunder to use designers that are out of step with the organization," clim8 tweeted Friday.

Does the university's hope to give the UC system a fresh new look have merit, or is tradition the way to go? Let us know in the comments section or by tweeting @LANow.

ALSO:

10 barrels of toxic materials left on Burbank street

Pot shop director heartened by Obama's comments

Jenni Rivera case: Allegations of police theft shock mourning fans

-- Larry Gordon and Samantha Schaefer

Photo: The traditional University of California seal, left, and the new logo, right. Credit: Associated Press

UC's new logo prompts criticism, petition [Talk back]

Corporate and cheap? A "loading" symbol? A toilet flushing? Critics of the University of California's logo have taken to the Web to protest a simplified version of the University's “Let There Be Light” seal.

A video posted by the UC shows the old logo's transformation into the modern, "boldly Californian" take. The simplified logo features a blue "U" that mimics the shape of a book with a “C” resting at the bottom, in various colors. It can be seen in action on the UC Office of the President's website. 

Creators of an online petition opposed to the change say the new logo "loses the prestige and elegance of the current seal." They want the 10-campus system to use the traditional circular medallion that shows an open book, the motto “Let There Be Light” and the 1868 date of UC’s founding. Or find a dignified alternative. The petition had more than 39,000 supporters so far.

UC system spokeswoman Dianne Klein said that critics wrongly assume that UC is eliminating the traditional symbol. In fact, that will remain on all diplomas and official correspondence, such as presidential letters, among other uses. But she said the old logo does not reproduce well in small size on Internet pages and that UC wanted something more visually contemporary and versatile, especially for online efforts to seek donations and recruit applicants.

“Like anything with design and change, people have opinions,” Klein said. She added that alumni, students and parents were consulted about the new design, which was created by an in-house design team at no extra cost to the university.

Online protest rages over 'ugly,' 'undignified' new UC logo [Talkback]

Some students and alumni have started an online petition to drop the University of California's new and simpler logo.

"The old logo is elegant. The new one looks like a logo from a bad online university," one person wrote on a Facebook page devoted to the issue.

"I want to keep the dignity of the UC seal," another wrote.

The new logo has a solid “U” containing a “C” resting at the bottom, in various colors. Foes contend it “does not represent the stature and honor of the University of California.”

They want the 10-campus system to use the traditional circular medallion that shows an open book, the motto “Let There Be Light” and the 1868 date of UC’s founding. Or find a dignified alternative.

UC system spokeswoman Dianne Klein said critics wrongly assume that UC is eliminating the traditional symbol. In fact, that will remain on all diplomas and official correspondence such as presidential letters, among other uses.

But she said the old logo does not reproduce well in small size on Internet pages and that UC wanted something more visually contemporary and versatile, especially for online efforts to seek donations and recruit applicants.

“Like anything with design and change, people have opinions,” Klein said. She added that alumni, students and parents were consulted about the new design, which was created by an in-house design team at no extra cost to the university.

What do you think of the new logo? Share your views below.

ALSO:

Sheriff's captain critically injured in car crash

City Beat: L.A.'s 311 operators field some unusual calls

3 found dead in Azusa home were siblings, friend says

-- Larry Gordon 

Graphic: University of California logos. Credit: University of California

Love the holidays? Send The Times your best photos

Do you have the best display of Christmas lights on the block? Prove it -- we want to see your best holiday photos.

Send us pictures of your lights, Christmas tree, festive pet and any other holiday photos you snap this year, and we'll feature the best ones. Don't forget to let us know where you took the photo.

Tweet them to @latimes with the hashtag #LATholidays or submit them here.

ALSO:

Lindsay Lohan's latest charges could bring jail time

Ex-cops ask judge to toss criminal charges in Kelly Thomas death

Tennis umpire Lois Goodman: "I have always maintained my innocence"

-- Samantha Schaefer

Photo: Christmas decor at the Americana at Brand in 2011. Credit: Ricardo DeAratanha / Los Angeles Times

Talk back: California gets Powerball. Will you play?

California will soon be in the money.

The California Lottery Commission voted Thursday to bring Powerball to California, with ticket sales to begin in April. The starting jackpot is $40 million.

The vote came just one day after the drawing for Powerball's $587.5-million jackpot. Two winning  tickets were sold in Arizona and Missouri.

QUIZ: Test your knowledge of Powerball

Powerball players purchase a $2 ticket and choose five unique numbers from a field of one through 59, and a Powerball number from one through 35. The Powerball number can be the same as any of the first five numbers.

California is one of eight states that currently does not offer the Powerball game. Other states that do not offer the game are Utah, Nevada, Alabama, Alaska, Hawaii, Mississippi and Wyoming.

The commission believes adding Powerball could net the state from $90 million to $120 million annually in lottery revenue, according to a memo sent by Lottery Commissioner Robert O'Neill to other commission members.

Californians, are you planning on getting in the game? Let us know what you think about Powerball in the comments below or by tweeting @LANow.

Join Times reporter Wesley Lowery and city editor Shelby Grad at 3:45 p.m. for a Google+ hangout on Powerball in California.

Here's what social media users had to say about the news:

ALSO:

Talk back: Should California restaurants serve banned foie gras?

Audit faults LAUSD for not reporting charges of sexual misconduct

State Supreme Court rejects Costa Mesa's appeal on job outsourcing

--Wesley Lowery and Samantha Schaefer

Submit your best holiday photos to The Times

Along with crazed shopping, the days after Thanksgiving are when holiday decorating kicks into high gear.

With the season upon us, we want to see your best holiday photos. Send us pictures of your holiday lights display, Christmas tree, boat parade and any other festive photos you snap this year, and we’ll feature the best ones. Don’t forget to let us know where you took the photo.

Tweet them to @latimes with the hashtag #LATholidays or submit them here.

ALSO:

Chula Vista man convicted of impersonating police officer

Lindsay Lohan to be charged with lying to Santa Monica police

Oceanside husband, accused of cooking wife on stove, due in court

-- Samantha Schaefer

Photo: Shoppers pack The Grove in Los Angeles on Dec. 24, 2010. Credit: Jay L. Clendenin / Los Angeles Times

Talk back: Should California restaurants serve banned foie gras?

Foie gras was banned in California in July, but there's still duck-liver drama in the Golden State.

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals announced Wednesday it was suing a Hermosa Beach restaurant over the delicacy, alleging that Hot's Kitchen is breaking the law by changing the name of its "Foie Gras Burger" to "THE Burger" and serving foie gras on the side.

As The Times' Michael J. Mishak reported on PolitiCal:

Foie gras is made from geese and ducks who are force-fed through a pipe to plump their livers, a practice that animal welfare advocates have long decried. California's ban forbids the in-state sale and production of products derived from force-fed birds. Violators face a potential fine of as much as $1,000 a day.

"No restaurant can act outside the law by illegally selling the diseased livers of abused birds, and PETA will help make sure that this one doesn't," said PETA attorney Jeff Kerr in a statement.

A spokeswoman for Hot's Kitchen, Kelley Coughlan, said the restaurant had not been served with a lawsuit so far. "Hot’s stands by its previous statement that foie gras can be made humanely, and we continue to provide our customers with wholesome, humane animal products," she said in a statement.

The eatery's parent company, Hot's Restaurant Group, joined with foie gras producers in July to file its own lawsuit seeking an injunction against the new law, which it argues is too vague.

In July, one of the restaurant's managers, Christina Parrott, defended the foie gras burger in an interview with a local news site after the ban took effect.

"Technically, we're not breaking the law," she said, explaining that the foie gras is served, not sold, as a side.

The foie gras ban went into effect July 1. Do you support the move? Has your opinion changed since the ban went into effect? Share your thoughts in the comments section below or tweet us @lanow.

ALSO:

Architect accused in firefighter's death to face trial

Rain in L.A. brings a shower of complaints, jokes on Twitter

Witness says man had hands on head when shot by deputies

Photo: Seared foie gras. Credit: Richard Hartog / Los Angeles Times