I’m not arguing that. I’m curious if there’s more research and some specific reason to consider people are ‘born’ pedophiles. Brain damage is a very likely cause in some cases, and certainly possible before or at the time of birth.
:rolleyes: Ha ha. Seriously, of course having unrealized sexual fantasies about committing murder is victimless—it isn’t even a crime. Attempting to realize any such fantasies, however, does put you squarely in the “crime” category.
The complexities of human sexuality make possible an essentially infinite number of weird desires and fetishes. Most of us are fortunate enough to have our tastes fall within the range of acts involving consenting adults that don’t cause severe physical harm or risk, and are therefore legal. The unfortunate minority who are genuinely innately impelled to seek gratification in other kinds of acts should certainly not be encouraged or allowed to act on their desires, but it doesn’t do any good to pretend they don’t exist or just summarily dismiss them as evil monsters.
I can’t support this with any evidence but it has occurred to me that one of the reasons pedophiles (all child molesters really, though not all are pedophiles) are looked upon with such complete revulsion is the perception that they cannot be “cured” or prevented from reoffending.
I was aware of some programs for youthful offenders years ago that were thought to be effective, but have no idea if these are still around or what results they were able to demonstrate.
So I wonder if it might not work better the other way around, i.e. if folks were aware there was effective therapy or prevention of some kind they might be more able to see this as an illness rather than monstrosity.
I’m one of the “older gay men” who remember all too well how we used to be thought of as an abomination . . . not by religious extremist jerks, but by the mainstream, even the most liberal. People like us lost their families, their friends, their jobs, their homes, and sometimes their lives, and most people thought “it served them right” for engaging in deviant behavior.
I sometimes wonder whether someday we’ll have a Pedophile Liberation Movement . . . not to make it ok to have sex with little kids (as in NAMBLA), but to at least find a better way to address the problem, without considering these people criminals. I don’t know whether anyone is born a pedophile, or becomes one somehow, and it really doesn’t matter, any more than the reason why I’m attracted to men. What is important is that there are so many of these people, and to turn them into pariahs makes them feel they have nothing to lose. And that has horrific consequences.
I hear you on the bad memories; I’m old enough to remember what you speak of in terms of attitudes toward gay men, though thankfully I didn’t grow up in a community where the majority of people thought that way.
But I’m not sure that anyone knows how many pedophiles there are, or how many crimes against children or what types are committed by pedophiles. I’ve read that many of the less violent offenses are committed by opportunists–people who are not especially attracted to children but who take advantage of vulnerable kids when they are able; that type is said to also take advantage of vulnerable adult men and women when they can. Other offenders are considered “predators” who will put themselves in positions of trust to get access to kids, and while it’s only a small percentage are considered the type most likely to injure or even kill kids. And then there’s the fact that those who molest kids are significantly more likely to have been molested themselves.
What I’m getting at is that sexual crimes against children cannot all be explained by some people (women as well as men) simply being naturally attracted to kids. I agree that there are such people and that trying to understand and treat them makes a lot of sense, but we’re a long way from knowing how or even whom to treat to try to prevent these crimes.
And they are–and of course should be–crimes, very unlike having same-sex partners.
Sorry but I don’t really care about the reasons, if someone touches a child that way they need to be locked up and then given some kind of aversion therapy. If this includes chemical castration then tough, I really have no sympathy for them that act at all.
Reading the OP it seems to be people who have had a brain injury and have low IQ’s, well no great surprise there.
To even suggest that this is comparable to gay men or women is wrong. Gay sex when between two or a thousand consenting adults is very different to the abuse of power that an adult has over a child, what next are rapists OK?
Perhaps you should. The reasons why some people abuse children certainly don’t make any difference when it comes to prohibiting child sexual abuse, but they certainly matter when it comes to understanding child sexual abuse.
I’m not a fan of the atittude that wilful ignorance and incomprehension is a proper response to evil and destructive behavior. The worse an act is, the more crucial it becomes to gain some insight into why people commit it.
Sure, child molesters should be locked up when we catch them after they abuse children. But wouldn’t it be preferable to have an approach to child molestation that worked better at stopping molesters from abusing children in the first place? If some sympathy in societal attitudes towards pedophiles (still without any tolerance for pedophilic acts, of course) meant that fewer children got sexually abused, would you still self-righteously refuse to be sympathetic?
I think you’re missing the point: nobody is saying that child sexual abuse is OK, or arguing that it’s morally comparable to gay sex between consenting adults.
Rather, the question is whether pedophilia is somewhat comparable to homosexuality in that both might be to some extent biologically normal, in the sense of falling on a spectrum of naturally occurring human sexual desires.
Sure, nobody should molest children and nobody should be allowed to get away with molesting children. That’s a given. But if we’re extending that to mean “nobody should be allowed even to acknowledge an innate desire to molest children, or even to investigate whether such desires are hard-wired in some people the way that same-sex attraction is hard-wired in gay people”, that’s a lot more draconian.
The thing is, if we try to find a reason, it’s the next step to finding a way to prevent more abuse from occurring.
But ephophillia is a gray area… Not saying I approve of it…but it’s a gray area. It’s not quite the same as little kids…it is bad b/c most young teens are still trying to figure out about relationships and are at the “OMG he’s my BOYFRIEND” stage when their crush smiles at them…but its a bit more understandable…and hell who was it, who said that “you’re attracted to your kid’s teen friends, and then they open their mouths and ruin the entire fanasty?”
Not to ruin your day (;)), but this was an excellent post.
Yes, looking it up I see that pedophilia does specifically concern prepubescent children. The looser way it’s used in the media had me thinking it meant attraction to anyone below the age of legal consent. So I retract my point.
It’s relevant to this thread though as ephophillia is also ostracized. Though probably to a lesser degree.
If I had a male friend who was teaching adolescents of age 16-17, I’d simply assume that he’d probably find some fraction of them physically attractive (not to imply that that attraction = ephophilia, just showing there’s more tolerance for that kind of attraction).
Aw thanks, magellan. 
They get it worse than pedos. Can’t even masturbate, you see.
This is one of the larger issues however, having to live a lie, pretend you are something you are not over fear of alienation, this is common in the homosexual community, and the question if to come out of the closet. This has also prevented victims from speaking up as to what has been done to them, and many other related conditions. As long as society will alienate such people who do come out there will be greater incentive not to, does that help or does it allow the issue to build increasing the chances of, in this case, hurting a child?
I am one for understanding what drives this behavior as I am to understand what drives murderers. What I don’t think is warranted is some kind of softening of societies view on it. If someone goes to a place for help with their thoughts then I think that this is great and I hope that people do but if they don’t and they touch a child then I have no sympathy.
Sorry but again comparing homosexuality with pedophilia is just wrong. In my opinion pedophilia is a severe mental defect and like we do for other dangerous mental patients we should incarcerate those that cross the line or are a real threat.
So for what it’s worth I am 100% behind understanding why and then putting in place strategies to minimize but in no way will I ever support any softening of attitudes to pedophilia. I am not sure what it’s like in the USA but in Australia there are places people like this can turn to.
As a former kid who was victimized, I can say I’d probably have spoken up about it a lot sooner and to more appropriate people if I didn’t think my abuser was going to be locked up and beaten in jail and maybe face the death penalty for what he did to me. Because, like many kids, I loved my abuser. He was (is) family. I didn’t want to see him go to jail; I wanted him to stop touching me like that.
Not that he’d actually have faced the death penalty, mind you. But the evilness of child sexual abuse was so thoroughly pounded into my head that I was certain if I told, he’d be executed.
I’d have spoken up a lot sooner if someone had explained that he was sick, and wrong, and the grownups were going to work together to get him the help he needed to get better and never hurt another kid.
So would it have prevented my abuse if we treated pedophilic tendencies as a mental illness worth treating with compassion? I don’t know. But it would have prevented the abuse of several other children who came after me if I had told sooner.
I understand your pain probably more than you realize but it is not and never was your fault that he continued with his abuse.
As a kid I did not think my friend’s abuser was going to get all bent up in jail we just thought we were wrong and no one listens to kids until my dad sensed something was wrong with me, put two and two together and explained to me that he loved me. Once that was done it all came spilling out and the bloke got locked up as he should have. Now I don’t think he got the help he needed inside but that is another story altogether.
FYI my mate told me what happened to him, we were 9.
Humans love to dehumanize other people. It would make sense to me to simply make people who are attracted to children recognizable to the public, not sure off the top of my head how that could be done… and then allow them to go about there lives. These people need to work, to have a place to live etc.
I’m referring to individuals in the world who have been caught engaging in sex with kids or looking at child porn etc.
Society simply is not mature enough to adopt such an idea I guess.
Um why would it be biologically normal to be attracted to small children?
I could have sworn that I read that pedos tend to have a lot of other mental health issues.
I think public perception of the condition of paedophilia has been shaped by the fact that it’s treated as interchangeable with the crime of child molestation. A teacher hooking up with a fifteen year old student isn’t a paedophile unless said fifteen year old is sexually immature, but newspapers will lead with HANG THE PAEDO SCUM because it fits on a front page better.
If there was the ability to treat paedophilia like drug addiction (as something that isn’t illegal in and of itself, but has a high chance of leading to illegality if desires are acted upon), then hopefully that would lead to greater understanding and maybe reduce the crime rates. Of course, the first meeting of Paedophiles Anonymous would be firebombed by a vigilante group.