Disturbing Sexual Desires- Evil, Medical Problem, or Perfectly Okay?

Great Debates
21

Hazel - I agree with you about distinguishing between young adults and actual children, it’s an important point. I think an adult who is consistently attracted to much younger people (ie a guy in his 40s who always goes out with 15/16 year old girls) is more emotionally stunted whereas someone aroused by a pre-pubescent child is physically warped (something wrong with brain chemistry or whatever).

I understand where you’re coming from about the walled city. There seem to be a hell of a lot of paedophiles out there. Given the cost of locking them up in prison, and the fact that these people are only a risk to a certain element of society - means an alternative to life imprisonment in the conventional sense may be needed.

People that can’t be rehabilitated should never be let free in mainstream society. We cannot put their rights and freedom above the rights of innocent children, or the rights of any innocent people. I have read studies on chemical and physical castration. These methods do not always (in fact rarely) work. Sometimes if the desire is there but not the means to carry it out, a paedophile will rape or hurt a child with another object instead.

An open prison/electronic tagging is obviously not then a possibility. However a more open-style prison on an island might be. Eg an uninhabited island. This might sound crazy - but it costs hundreds of thousands of dollars per prisoner per year in some high security jails. An offending paedophile’s life is just not worth that expense to society, IMO, when there are so many other deserving causes. Yet in the absence of the death penalty if we are forced to keep the worst cases alive, then yes, let us consider some sort of exile or alternative society for them.

Another issue is that abuse has been shown to breed abuse. If we do not cut it out of mainstream society we will never be able to reduce the problem.

Personally I hope that we can one day find a “cure” - even if it is a form of chemical or physical surgery that effectively mentally impairs the offender further. Anything that can cheaply and effectively control them - or help them control themselves - seems like the best option.

22

'Fraid I gotta disagree with ya, istara. The rights of children (from a legalistic standpoint) are less than the rights of adults, although not by much. Also, there are many other “icky” fantasies (rape comes to mind) that an industry has grown around, and (some of) society has accepted.
When you think about it, this thread is really scary. We, intelligent, well-connected people, are seriously considering massive violations of someone’s rights, based on their thoughts.

23

Ahem . . . excuse me… when we’re talking about exiling, or “curing even if it leaves them further mentally impaired” (lobotomy???) the pedophiles … you all mean those who HAVE at least attempted or made credibly manifest their intention to act it out… right? Please tell me that is so…
Otherwise let’s remember, the OP is not exclusively on pederasty, but includes also “rape fantasy” and other “disturbing desires”. NOT “disturbing actual criminal acts”.

I’d fall into the side of the extreme paraphilias being the result of some developmental irregularity. But listen, a surprisingly LARGE proportion of the general population at some point in life does experience SOME kind of mental health situation that would be amenable to therapy of some sort.

However they can only become “evil” if you actually attempt to cross the line into hurting others. I will leave aside that many religions say entertaining those fantasies even while not acting them out – “what you whack off to” in the OPs words – makes you “sinful”: we’re talking about whether it’s morally evil, legally criminal, or medically sick. IMO if a person has experienced “disturbing” deviant impulses but is together enough to – by him/herself or with professional help – realize it, figure it out, put a lid on it/redirect it, and carry on with a normal, law abiding life, perhaps confining their paraphilia to consensual play-acting with other like-minded individuals (e.g. staged rape fantasy), they should be allowed on with their lives as long as they don’t interfere with anyone else’s, and it should not be held against them (unless they are trying to declare themselves arbiters of virtue, and it thus becomes relevant to their credibility).

If they volunteer that they fear they can’t restrain themselves, or show signs of intent to act out, * and the desire is for something criminal*, (e.g. pedophilia, rape, incest) professional help should be called in quickly.

In the specific case of of pedophilia, no problem with having it be mandatory and in combination with close supervision and behavior-mod, since there is a compelling greater interest. As to the ineffectiveness and unrehabilitability angle, I can’t help but notice that what I have been able to see of the literature about that all involves the criminals who already have taken the plunge off the edge. What do we know of early mental-health-care intervention? Can we even have early intervention?

When the paraphilia leads you to commit or attempt a rape, a murder, or child molestation, then there’s no doubt: it has become evil. Let there be punishment.

24

I know I’m scared.

In case you missed some confessions in earlier threads, I guess I ought to come out and say that I have very strong, very extreme rape fantasies. I know for a fact that I will never rape somebody. Beyond the fact that I find rape anywhere beyond the fantasy realm to be a repulsive act, I am simply not equipt for it- I’m a girl.

I can’t believe what I am hearing. How can we even hold people accountable for their desires, much less jail them for them? I’m disgusted.

25

I’m basing my assumption that most pedophiles will act on their impulses on the belief that few people are willing or able to maintain lifelong celebacy. And the belief that few people are willing or able to maintain a sex life that is counter to their real preference (a genuine pedophile presumably doesn’t want to have sex with an adult).

And yes, I do think genuine pedophiles are mentally ill. Def: a genuine pedophile is someone whose sexual orientation is entirely toward pre-pubesent children.

What we do now makes no sence. We sentence men convicted of raping or molesting children to jail for a while, then let them go. Once free, how likely is it that they won’t do it again?

Pedophiles need to be kept away from children for life.

I’m not saying we should hand out life sentences to people who have not committed a crime. I’m saying that the penalty for raping or molesting a pre-pubescent child should be life inprisonment, for the purpose of keeping them away from children.

I’m also saying that, if Pediaphiletowns existed, and if it was possible to lead an okay life in them, some pediaphiles might voluntarily check themselves in, in order to avoid the constant temptations they face living on the outside, with children all around.

26

What about people who arn’t full time pedophiles? It is possible to desire little kids but not to desire them exclusively. What about the guy with a wife and a fairly normal life who occasionally, but not always, thinks about kids when he wacks off? What if you have an erotic dream involving pedophilia? Where is the line between “okay” and “lock him up in pedophilia town”?

27

Like I said, dear, the thread is drifting away from your OP, and into "what to do with/to ‘actual pedophiles’ ".

Though Hazel has clarified things a bit, I can’t imagine how that would in any way differ from a gulag. How would a Penal Colony,and to top it one entirely composed of mentally ill people, allow for anyone to “lead an OK life in them” and be an attractive alternative for the NON-OFFENDING person with incipient deviant tendencies to voluntarily exile himself from humanity forever? I’d expect that by definition if you’re confined to internal exile you are NOT “leading an OK life” !

28

** Hazel** et al.

I asked for cites demonstrating what you all seem to assume as true.

not one of you has submitted any.

I even gave you a hint of what to look for.

You keep on asserting that you ‘know’ that therapy doesn’t help, that there is no cure and that they always will molest again so, should be kept away from children.

I am still waiting for substantive data from research which demonstrates that any draconian measures are necessary.

try doing a search in GD here on Child molestation, Megans’ laws etc. we’ve discussed it before and data has been presented.

29

I think I have made this analogy before somewhere on here, anyways, here’s my take…

Say you love diamonds, and you are window shopping and see in a jewelry store window the most awesome diamond… you go home and for weeks you dream of having it…(hell, maybe you even masturbate while thinking of it) the point is, are your desires going to lead you to break in and steal it? If so, you crossed the line, if you however just continue to fantasize you aren’t hurting anyone… furthermore, I supose a weak will/mind will sooner or later cross the line, but a normal healthy mind will know that you do not go past this point…I think sickness is when you can’t control yourself any longer and you finally cross the line… “normal” knows its boundaries. :slight_smile:

30

Re: rape fantasies. We had quite a lively discussion on this on a list I manage, and it was pointed out time and again that the term is misleading, at least when it’s a woman having these fantasies. If you are fantasizing about being raped, you are actually in control and are gaining pleasure in the fantasy. If you are actually being raped, you have no control/choice and are not gaining pleasure.

I don’t know anything about men having fantasies about raping women. In your fantasies, are you overpowering a woman who eventually begins to respond and enjoy the encounter, or is it an actual rape, in that the woman does not enjoy the encounter and may even vomit or be put in pain? It makes a difference: in the first scenario it verges more on the ‘reluctant seduction’ or BDSM type of fantasy; in the second, it is a violence/aggression fantasy.

Either way, sexual fantasy can be a cathartic outlet for issues that are not acceptable when actually acted upon.

As far as what Hazel delightfully termed ‘ephebophilia’, I agree that there is a distinct difference between that and pedophilia. One of my pleasurable fantasy themes is that of Bagoas, the teen-age eunuch in Mary Renault’s ‘The Persian Boy’ (sometimes I’m Bagoas, sometimes I’m Alexander <g>). FWIW, my grandmother was married at 16 to a man in his late 30s/early 40s, had three children, and died at 20.

31

Threads with links to the data demonstrating that pedophiles do not ‘always’ re-molest and that therapy is a distinct benefit to those convicted.

here and here Look for my posts and Spirtis Mundi’s

will highlight this one in particular.

32

Oh god yes certainly - sorry for not making it clear in my post.

[quote]
** 'Fraid I gotta disagree with ya, istara. The rights of children (from a legalistic standpoint) are less than the rights of adults, although not by much. **
Uh? Surely not to be abused though. Surely it is the right of any innocent person NOT to be abused at the hands of an illegal harmer (for want of better term). I actually wrote: We cannot put their rights and freedom above the rights of innocent children, or the rights of any innocent people - I surely don’t see how you could disagree with this. We don’t put the rights of rapists above that of innocent women, which is why we lock them up. Surely we do the same for the rights of innocent potential paedophilia victims?

Please note again I am talking about actual offenders here, not fantasisers. However I would also advocate trying to prevent confessed or known fantasisers (eg users of computer generated kiddie porn who haven’t done anything technically illegal) from working with children.

33

istara - please look through actual data posted.

You’re suggesting some pretty horrific penalties (yes, I understand that we don’t want people to molest children and it’s a very bad thing), but lobotomies?

and, I’d also hope that you look at what the reality is in terms of cases prosecuted, situations involved etc.

Cases I personally know about:

  1. 17 year old who’d been molested his whole life by his dad and uncle, had contact with a younger boy (14). He served 3 years in prison. He’s been out for more than a decade and has not had any further contact w/the law.

  2. 2 other young men (ages 18 and 17) who had sexual relations with 15 year olds.

  3. 21 year old at a party. Has contact w/female he believes is 18 (she told him so). she wasn’t. she was 14.

And, according to the links I’ve presented therapy works. So why on earth would you require draconian measures when something less appauling is shown to work?

34

What I meant was that children lack certain rights (suffrage etc.) and people, including pedophiles, are still innocent until proven guilty. Meaning that the pedophile’s right to a fair trial trumps the “right” of kids to be safe by having all potentail molesters exiled/mangled/etc. Nother question: A pedophile (the nasty kind) takes care to ply his trade overseas. Say, in Japan, where the age of consent was just recently moved up to 13. Can we nail him for crimes comitted overseas not against U.S. citizens?

35

wring - please read my post. I feel it is important to distinguish between post and pre-pubescent “children”. In no way would I put any of those cases you mention into the category of (moral) paedophila, though they might be defined as child molestation by the law. In all the cases you mention (a) the “victims” are young adults rather than children, and (b) the “offenders” aren’t much older themselves. 21/15 is in no way in the same league as 42/8 or 30/4.

Please note I used " " because I don’t think (at least in the second two cases you mention - in the first I can’t establish what “contact” defines as - eg mutual relationship, or unwanted sexual abuse?) these are real cases of sexual offence.

As regards harsh penalties: I didn’t actually specify lobotomy, but let’s use that as the example since you mention it. If - and only if - doctors later discover some form of lobotomy is the only way to moderate the behaviour of a certain type of violent or persistent offender, for whom rehabilitation is not a viable option, and that offender has already offended, perhaps repeatedly, but their behaviour would be totally safe and social given this special lobotomy, then I say go for it. Perhaps we could give them the option of life imprisonment OR release with lobotomy.

Therapy can work. But it doesn’t always. If it did, convicted paedophiles would never reoffend, and we know they do.

Many offenders (or even fantasists) are desperate to control their behaviour/fantasy. There have even been cases of such people mutilating (ie castrating) themselves to try and curb their desires. These people might opt for an effective medical solution. In the case of fantasists, this would have to be on a voluntary basis, as they are still innocent of crime.

robertliguori - I think we are misunderstanding one another. I never advocated disallowing accused paedophiles a fair trial. Nor did I advocate exiling or chemically castrating all potential offenders. Just actual ones.

Children’s lack of suffrage has absolutely no bearing on this, it is not a relevant issue. Humans of any age are equal when it comes to protective rights. In fact, children have higher protection in some areas, eg rape of a child often carrying a heavier penalty than rape of an adult.

36

You’re right, istara. Let’s see if I can be a little more clear. We cannot make children more safe at the expense of others’s rights, and legally speaking, there are some rights children don’t have, which are admittedly not germane to this discussion. We can’t do anything to pedophiles that we couldn’t do to ordinary rapists just because their victims were children, because of cruel and unusual punishment. I’m assuming that you live in the U.S.

37

Andrew Vachss has been working as an advocate of children most of his adult life. In addition to writing a bestselling series of novels dealing with pedophiles and other deviants (by deviant I mean someone who acts upon his/her extreme fantasies/drives) he is also an educator and child advocate lawyer who has done extensive research into the psychology of sexual predation and, particularly, sexual predation upon children.

His article “Sex Predators Can’t Be Saved” (http://www.vachss.com/av_dispatches/disp_9301_a.html) from the 1/5/1993 edition of the New York Times has some sane and responsible thoughts on the issue, as do all his articles and interviews in which the topic is addressed.

His interviews and articles written about and by him are available here:
http://www.vachss.com/av_interviews.html http://www.vachss.com/av_articles.html
http://www.vachss.com/av_dispatches.html

I urge anyone with an interest in fighting this kind of predation to read what he says. As is evident, he has been dealing with this kind of thing for decades. We, at least most of us, have not. You may not agree with his thoughts, but you can’t argue against his experience.

38

Well written, but there are a few bits that seem a little odd to me. He says at one point that slightly less than half of convicted sex predators will commit additional crimes, then says that the only thing that can be done with sex criminals is to imprison them for life without parole or execute them. He also greatly stereotypes sexual predators as a whole in the article as all behaving in a certain way, even after he’s dropped the stat that shows they don’t.

(Though I’m still wondering why this thread side-tracked into just pedophilia and child molestation instead of “disturbing” sexual fantasies as in the OP…)

39

Australia certainly has some laws like that
I believe that we’re currently the only country to have laws explicitly forbidding our own citizens from indulging in pedophilia, even while not in the country. I suspect (IANAL) that unless there’s a similar statute in the US (which explicitly states that it applies outside the borders of the US), the case you mention would not be covered by US law at the moment.

However, presumably such a law could be written, if there was a need. If the US can make laws about whether Canadians can trade with Cuba, I don’t suppose that a Child Sex Tourism Act would be all that controversial.

By the way…
[hijack]
** Squish ** Bagoas is Alex’s lover between 16 and 23 , isn’t he?. So I’d say you just have yourself an ordinary gay fantasy there. Now Bagoas and Darius, that’s ephebophilia…
Sorry, but you did have to quote one of my favourite authors, didn’t you :slight_smile:
[/hijack]

40

Phoenix Dragon, Vachss says in the article (although he says it very quickly and in such a way that it’s easy to overlook) that therapy can work for those who want to, something like “it has to be chosen rather than referred.”

His harder edged statements, such as life without parole and execution, are based solely on the predators who give the “usual spiel” (My phrase, not his) and doen’t demonstrate actual remorse for their offenses. Also, I don’t think he paints with a broad brush at all. A lifetime of work in the field has allowed him to develop a profile of the offender. As with serial killers, there are common charactistics and experiences shared by most pedophiles and sexual predators.

Still, I’ve read a great deal of his work both fiction and non; so I may be projecting things I’ve picked up from his other pieces to fill in gaps. I still strongly recommend him as the leading front-line source on the issue, as well as a great bibliographic link to other information.

I do need to apologize to the OP for aiding in the highjack though. Toward that end, my thoughts about the point of the OP are as follows:

A desire is never wrong. Acting on a desire that causes someone else harm or injury without their informed, explicit conscent is always wrong.

Therapy should be sought when the desire to act on a desire outside of that framework becomes strong enough to cause the person having the desire worry. For example, say I have a rape fantasy about a specific woman. If I masturbate all the livelong day over that fantasy, I’m not doing anything wrong. If, however, I start developing an urge to act out that fantasy without the woman’s concent (thereby differentiating “rape” from “rape fantasy”) I need help.

People with these “deviant” desires are usually perfectly happy. I know many people with rape fantasies, men and women, attacker and victim. I know that some of these people even act out their fantasies with each other’s conscent and things like safe words, quick release handcuffs, etc. to ensure that safety is never actually in danger. Personally, I don’t think a desire can be deviant, since I am absolutely certain everone has what is to them a “shameful” or “deviant” fantasy at some point in their lives.

As repulsive as the idea is to me personally, I’m certain there are lots of people who have sexual fantasies about pre-pubescent children, animals, torture, etc. As long as they don’t take action on these fantasies, they’re fine. When they start wanting to act out the fantasy, if they aren’t socio or psychopathic, they can get help and work actively with their therapist to find positive outlets for their desires. If they are insane, then they won’t benefit from therapy. They need both psyciatric help and the willingness to overcome their condition, which is not likely to happen I don’t think.

Lastly, when someone does commit rape, child molestation, torture, etc., that person needs to be removed from society. He or she has now tasted the power they were wondering about, and I’m pretty convinced that the desire for that power will be too hard a jones to overcome, particularly given that it will start taking more and more violence and violation to get the same feeling. Like any addictive situation, you desensitize and develop a tolerance. There’s not likely to be a great chance at rehabilitation at that point. While it resembles addiction, it’s also very different in that it’s generated from inside your own unbalanced head rather than an outside stimulus.

In writing the above I hit upon my differentiation point between the fantasy and the non-fantasy execution of the same act, and why I find one acceptable and the other a cause for life in prison: The fantasy, no matter how twisted, is about sexual gratification. The real world deviant act is about power, control and violation, not sex.

Lastly, I would paraphrase (or maybe actually quote if I remember it right) Lady Sally McGee: The only sex acts I would proscribe, for reasons of the public health, are those involving former food and former people.