# Pedophiliacs: Should we feel sympathy for them? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 17, 2009, 5:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pedophiliacs-should-we-feel-sympathy-for-them/510462 "2009-09-17T17:19:45Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Don\_t\_Call\_Me\_Shirley](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f4b2a3/32.png) [@Don\_t\_Call\_Me\_Shirley](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Don_t_Call_Me_Shirley)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2009, 7:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pedophiliacs-should-we-feel-sympathy-for-them/510462/21 "2009-09-17T19:30:25Z")
> [@hotflungwok](#): > > I’ve never been able to figure out how pedophiles manage to contact each other. How do you even bring it up with another person? I can’t imagine a more reviled group, and admitting you were one would risk pretty much every bad thing a society can do to an individual. Well, it’s easier than it’s ever been before. First of all, there’s the internet. Second, there have been so many laws passed recently telling them where they can and can’t live that they are starting to clump together in the only legal areas left. First, they couldn’t live near a school. Then, they added that they couldn’t live near a park. Now, it’s daycare centers. In the town where I work there is hardly anyplace left that they can legally live. When they add bus stops to the list, as they inevitably will, that will pretty much be the end of sex offenders living in towns. Plus, even if they are legally allowed to live in a place, a lot of people won’t rent to them. Apartment owners are checking the registry and refusing to rent to people if they are on it. In my office we have a large map with all the sex offenders marked with pins. Those pins are clumping into smaller and smaller groups. There is a trailer park outside of town that is, I would estimate, more than 50% registered sex offenders. Of course, since the vast majority of them didn’t snatch some kid from a park they lived nearby, but instead molested a family member or friend or alter boy, all of this restriction has done absolutely nothing to prevent children from being molested. It has helped some politicians get votes though. I guess people think that if someone wants to snatch a kid from a park to molest, but they live more than 1000 feet from the park, it won’t be worth their time to drive their windowless van a few blocks down the street, and they’ll just stay home instead. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2009, 7:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pedophiliacs-should-we-feel-sympathy-for-them/510462/22 "2009-09-17T19:35:42Z")
> [@Don\_t\_Call\_Me\_Shirley](#): > > Well, it’s easier than it’s ever been before. First of all, there’s the internet. Second, there have been so many laws passed recently telling them where they can and can’t live that they are starting to clump together in the only legal areas left. First, they couldn’t live near a school. Then, they added that they couldn’t live near a park. Now, it’s daycare centers. In the town where I work there is hardly anyplace left that they can legally live. When they add bus stops to the list, as they inevitably will, that will pretty much be the end of sex offenders living in towns. Plus, even if they are legally allowed to live in a place, a lot of people won’t rent to them. Apartment owners are checking the registry and refusing to rent to people if they are on it. In my office we have a large map with all the sex offenders marked with pins. Those pins are clumping into smaller and smaller groups. There is a trailer park outside of town that is, I would estimate, more than 50% registered sex offenders. > > Of course, since the vast majority of them didn’t snatch some kid from a park they lived nearby, but instead molested a family member or friend or alter boy, all of this restriction has done absolutely nothing to prevent children from being molested. It has helped some politicians get votes though. I guess people think that if someone wants to snatch a kid from a park to molest, but they live more than 1000 feet from the park, it won’t be worth their time to drive their windowless van a few blocks down the street, and they’ll just stay home instead. Some of them had consensual teenage sex. ---
**Author:** ![hotflungwok](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/edb3f5/32.png) [@hotflungwok](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hotflungwok)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2009, 7:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pedophiliacs-should-we-feel-sympathy-for-them/510462/23 "2009-09-17T19:41:53Z")
> [@Don\_t\_Call\_Me\_Shirley](#): > > Well, it’s easier than it’s ever been before. First of all, there’s the internet. But they still have the same problem as in real life, the risk is still there, only now your secret can be distributed to the world in seconds. Take **Cesario**. He claims to be an open pedophile. So maybe a closet pedophile might try to contact him. But how do we know what he really is? What if he’s just an actor trying to get real pedophiles to reveal themselves ala _To Catch a Predator_? Is the risk worth getting caught? ---
**Author:** ![gaffa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e68b1a/32.png) [@gaffa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gaffa)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2009, 8:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pedophiliacs-should-we-feel-sympathy-for-them/510462/24 "2009-09-17T20:07:08Z")
I sympathize with them, and am firmly in the “they can’t help the way they are wired” camp. Throwing them in jail is a death sentence - murderers, thieves and even those who have raped adults all despise “kiddie rapers” and make their time in prison as miserable and short as possible. I honestly hadn’t thought much about them until I saw the film [“Crumb”](http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0109508/). I’ve been a big fan of Robert Crumb for years, and was aware that his older brother Charles was a cartoonist as well, but that he had stopped drawing. If you’ve never seen this film, skip down to the next post. Charles was a pedophile. His first sexual impulses were while watching [“Treasure Island”](http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0043067/) and he developed an intense erotic obsession with Bobby Driscoll, the little boy in the lead role. All of the comics Charles, Robert and Max (the Crumb brother who may be even more messed up than the other two) drew became about “Treasure Island”. Charles even took to dressing up as a Long John Silver. The film soft-peddled Charles’ pedophilia, but he explicitly admitted it in his letters to Robert that were re-printed in [“Crumb Family Comics”](http://www.amazon.com/Crumb-Comics-Whole-Family-Crazy/dp/0867194278) calling himself a “homosexual pedophile”. The thing is, in addition to being a pedophile, Charles was intelligent and well-read with a highly developed ethical system, and knew, as well as anyone, that acting on his desires would be wrong. So he never left home. The film finds him in his early 50s still living in the bedroom of his mother’s house, essentially a shut-in since high school, terrified of his own desires and so doped up that he’s all but castrated. During the closing credits, we find out that Charles committed suicide before the film was finished. What were his choices? As an artist, he presumably was able to draw his fantasies (though none of his drawings that have been released contain anything inappropriate), but under some laws that have been proposed, he could be arrested for doing so. He never had a computer, but just looking for masturbatory material could get him thrown in jail. Again, what were his choices? I think pedophiles should be allowed to purchase computer-generated/modified porn featuring underage characters, because it’s clear that everyone needs an erotic outlet. I believe that this will reduce the chances of real children being harmed. As a married heterosexual male who has to spend a lot of time away from my wife, I know the ready availability of porn has made these long separations bearable, and I’ve never been tempted to stray. I believe the same would apply to pedophiles - porn availability would make having a socially harmful sexual orientation bearable, as long as no real children were involved. ---
**Author:** ![Freudian\_Slit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/5daacb/32.png) [@Freudian\_Slit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freudian_Slit)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2009, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pedophiliacs-should-we-feel-sympathy-for-them/510462/25 "2009-09-17T20:10:05Z")
> [@gaffa](#): > > I sympathize with them, and am firmly in the “they can’t help the way they are wired” camp. Throwing them in jail is a death sentence - murderers, thieves and even those who have raped adults all despise “kiddie rapers” and make their time in prison as miserable and short as possible. > > I honestly hadn’t thought much about them until I saw the film [“Crumb”](http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0109508/). I’ve been a big fan of Robert Crumb for years, and was aware that his older brother Charles was a cartoonist as well, but that he had stopped drawing. > > If you’ve never seen this film, skip down to the next post. > > Charles was a pedophile. His first sexual impulses were while watching [“Treasure Island”](http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0043067/) and he developed an intense erotic obsession with Bobby Driscoll, the little boy in the lead role. All of the comics Charles, Robert and Max (the Crumb brother who may be even more messed up than the other two) drew became about “Treasure Island”. For what it’s worth, I thought that Robert and Charles seemed relatively normal compared to Max, who was in fact a sex offender. I think it’s one thing to fantasize–that’s what you’re born with. But I’d feel actual discomfort being in a room with someone who had ever committed a sexual assault. ---
**Author:** ![gaffa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e68b1a/32.png) [@gaffa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gaffa)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2009, 8:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pedophiliacs-should-we-feel-sympathy-for-them/510462/26 "2009-09-17T20:21:59Z")
> [@Freudian\_Slit](#): > > For what it’s worth, I thought that Robert and Charles seemed relatively normal compared to Max, who was in fact a sex offender. As someone who has read everything Robert has drawn and written, the only difference is that Max did it to a stranger and was _arrested_. Robert was lucky in that fame allowed him to get away with behavior that would have resulted in arrest if the women involved hadn’t consented. For some reason people are a lot more forgiving of the behavior of famous “eccentric artists” (Picasso confessed to raping his models). > [@](#): > > I think it’s one thing to fantasize–that’s what you’re born with. But I’d feel actual discomfort being in a room with someone who had ever committed a sexual assault. I could see it if you were the object of their obsession. But if you were with Charles Crumb? Presumably you’re not a nine year old boy (if you are, you’re extraordinarily articulate), so no harm could possibly come to you. ---
**Author:** ![Freudian\_Slit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/5daacb/32.png) [@Freudian\_Slit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freudian_Slit)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2009, 8:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pedophiliacs-should-we-feel-sympathy-for-them/510462/27 "2009-09-17T20:28:44Z")
> [@gaffa](#): > > As someone who has read everything Robert has drawn and written, the only difference is that Max did it to a stranger and was _arrested_. Robert was lucky in that fame allowed him to get away with behavior that would have resulted in arrest if the women involved hadn’t consented. For some reason people are a lot more forgiving of the behavior of famous “eccentric artists” (Picasso confessed to raping his models). What exactly did Robert do? And if she consented, how would be assault to begin with? > [@](#): > > I could see it if you were the object of their obsession. But if you were with Charles Crumb? Presumably you’re not a nine year old boy (if you are, you’re extraordinarily articulate), so no harm could possibly come to you. Well, I meant, I’d be comfortable hanging out with Charles Crumb because I’m not a young boy, and also because I don’t think Charles ever acted on his fantasies. I wouldn’t be comfortable hanging out alone with Max Crumb who did confess to committing assault on a woman because I’d be afraid of being victimized. ---
**Author:** ![aldiboronti](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9fc348/32.png) [@aldiboronti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aldiboronti)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2009, 8:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pedophiliacs-should-we-feel-sympathy-for-them/510462/28 "2009-09-17T20:36:59Z")
I have no sympathy for them at all. Maybe they can’t help the way they’re wired. But they can certainly help whether they act on those urges. That’s the bottom line. If they allow their lust for kids to outweigh their common humanity then they have forfeited any right to sympathy. ---
**Author:** ![gaffa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e68b1a/32.png) [@gaffa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gaffa)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2009, 8:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pedophiliacs-should-we-feel-sympathy-for-them/510462/29 "2009-09-17T20:45:00Z")
> [@Freudian\_Slit](#): > > What exactly did Robert do? And if she consented, how would be assault to begin with? See: Pretty much R. Crumb’s entire body of work. I suppose it’s not assault if it’s in the context of a relationship, but a lot of it was forgiveness after the fact - jumping on a random womens back for a piggy-back ride at a gallery show, etc. Remember the part in the film where his ex-girlfriend Kathy said “I thought you were kidding”? She thought it was just play, while it was sex to Robert. Robert was luckier than Charles and Max in that the nature of his sexual obsessions and fame allowed him to indulge them without societal opprobrium. ---
**Author:** ![Freudian\_Slit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/5daacb/32.png) [@Freudian\_Slit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freudian_Slit)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2009, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pedophiliacs-should-we-feel-sympathy-for-them/510462/30 "2009-09-17T20:48:18Z")
> [@gaffa](#): > > See: Pretty much R. Crumb’s entire body of work. Well…how can that be sexual assault? It’s just drawings. Or are you saying that all that was inspired by actual actions? > [@](#): > > I suppose it’s not assault if it’s in the context of a relationship, but a lot of it was forgiveness after the fact - jumping on a random womens back for a piggy-back ride at a gallery show, etc. Remember the part in the film where his ex-girlfriend Kathy said “I thought you were kidding”? She thought it was just play, while it was sex to Robert. Robert was luckier than Charles and Max in that the nature of his sexual obsessions and fame allowed him to indulge them without societal opprobrium. Okay, yeah, that’s true. I guess it seems less skeevey when it’s something “safe” like a piggy back ride even though it’s obviously pretty sexual to him. R. Crumb seemed to have a better idea of what was socially appropriate compared to Max who was groping completely random people. ---
**Author:** ![gaffa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e68b1a/32.png) [@gaffa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gaffa)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2009, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pedophiliacs-should-we-feel-sympathy-for-them/510462/31 "2009-09-17T20:49:52Z")
> [@aldiboronti](#): > > I have no sympathy for them at all. Maybe they can’t help the way they’re wired. But they can certainly help whether they act on those urges. That’s the bottom line. If they allow their lust for kids to outweigh their common humanity then they have forfeited any right to sympathy. But we’re talking about two distinct groups - those who are sexually attracted to children and acted on that impulse, and those who are sexually attracted to children and did **not**. Do you have no sympathy for both groups? Personally, I find an ethical pedophile like Charles Crumb who fought against his sexual desires his entire life downright _heroic_. I can’t imagine having to do so. Again, I’m lucky in that the objects of my desire are perfectly legal. With pedophiles, even indulging their fantasy life is illegal. ---
**Author:** ![gaffa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e68b1a/32.png) [@gaffa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gaffa)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2009, 8:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pedophiliacs-should-we-feel-sympathy-for-them/510462/32 "2009-09-17T20:54:59Z")
> [@Freudian\_Slit](#): > > Well…how can that be sexual assault? It’s just drawings. Or are you saying that all that was inspired by actual actions? Robert Crumb is quite possibly the most brutally honest artist working today. Most of the stuff that’s drawn realistically actually happened. > [@](#): > > Okay, yeah, that’s true. I guess it seems less skeevey when it’s something “safe” like a piggy back ride even though it’s obviously pretty sexual to him. R. Crumb seemed to have a better idea of what was socially appropriate compared to Max who was groping completely random people. Max assaulted one woman. He pulled down the shorts of a woman who was standing in line in front of him at a store. It was a failure of impulse control. Last I heard, he’s in a long-term relationship with a woman who has done quite a bit to straighten his life out (my information came from Robert’s son Jesse). ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2009, 8:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pedophiliacs-should-we-feel-sympathy-for-them/510462/33 "2009-09-17T20:59:47Z")
> [@aldiboronti](#): > > I have no sympathy for them at all. Maybe they can’t help the way they’re wired. But they can certainly help whether they act on those urges. That’s the bottom line. If they allow their lust for kids to outweigh their common humanity then they have forfeited any right to sympathy. This, with the caveat that I don’t know that pedophiles are born that way (if that is what you meant by “wired”). It is not wrong to feel that way. It is wrong to act on it, ever. And I can do without the self-serving rhetoric about how you are doing it because you are liberating children from the societal burden of “the age of consent” and helping them get in touch with their sensual natures and the rest of the horseshit. You are doing out of your needs, not theirs. And if you genuinely can’t help yourself, then we as a society need to take whatever steps are necessary to stop you. There are some things for which no excuse will suffice. If an adult molests a child, it doesn’t matter why he did it. The important fact is that he did it. One time is too many; therefore twice is an unacceptable risk. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![gaffa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e68b1a/32.png) [@gaffa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gaffa)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2009, 9:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pedophiliacs-should-we-feel-sympathy-for-them/510462/34 "2009-09-17T21:19:42Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > This, with the caveat that I don’t know that pedophiles are born that way (if that is what you meant by “wired”). It is not wrong to feel that way. It is wrong to act on it, ever. I agree that it is wrong to act on it. But I’m fairly sure that pedophiles are “born” at the moment of their first sexual attraction. Everyone I know knew their sexual orientation from their first sexual impulses. Some of them fought against these impulses (generally, the folks who felt an attraction to their own gender). > [@](#): > > And I can do without the self-serving rhetoric about how you are doing it because you are liberating children from the societal burden of “the age of consent” and helping them get in touch with their sensual natures and the rest of the horseshit. You are doing out of your needs, not theirs. Agreed. > [@](#): > > And if you genuinely can’t help yourself, then we as a society need to take whatever steps are necessary to stop you. What steps are acceptable and necessary? Personally, I think a budding pedophile like the young Charles Crumb might have been re-oriented if his orientation had been identified early enough, in the same way that [young psychopaths have been successfully identified via fMRI](http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/11/10/081110fa_fact_seabrook?printable=true) before engaging in anti-social activities that harm others. But I suspect that might involve national health care. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2009, 9:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pedophiliacs-should-we-feel-sympathy-for-them/510462/35 "2009-09-17T21:54:56Z")
> [@gaffa](#): > > Personally, I think a budding pedophile like the young Charles Crumb might have been re-oriented if his orientation had been identified early enough, in the same way that [young psychopaths have been successfully identified via fMRI](http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/11/10/081110fa_fact_seabrook?printable=true) before engaging in anti-social activities that harm others. I don’t see anything in your cite about re-orienting anyone. AFAIK, it is not currently possible to change someone’s basic sexual orientation. That’s why people deny the effectiveness of the “ex-gay” organizations. > [@](#): > > But I’m fairly sure that pedophiles are “born” at the moment of their first sexual attraction. I thought the theory was that many pedophiles had themselves been molested, and had sexualized the experience. Thus they tend to seek out victims who appear to be roughly the same age as they were, when they were attacked. Or else are incredibly immature emotionally, like Michael Jackson appeared to be. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![gaffa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e68b1a/32.png) [@gaffa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gaffa)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2009, 11:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pedophiliacs-should-we-feel-sympathy-for-them/510462/36 "2009-09-17T23:06:37Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > I don’t see anything in your cite about re-orienting anyone. This bit: \*If a biological basis for psychopathy could be established and pharmacological treatments developed, the idea that many people have at least a little of the psychopath in them could well become accepted. As Kiehl points out, “It used to be the case that it was very hard to meet clinical criteria for depression in the fifties and sixties. However, the definition of depression has been broadened so much with DSM-IV that nearly every person will meet the criteria at some point in their lives. One reason for this is that drug companies have lobbied to change the criteria—because they have a treatment, a drug, that can help people even with moderate levels of depression. It’s a completely different issue whether this is appropriate.” He added that “even moderate levels of psychopathy may someday be considered a disorder—especially if we can treat it.” \* > [@](#): > > AFAIK, it is not currently possible to change someone’s basic sexual orientation. That’s why people deny the effectiveness of the “ex-gay” organizations. The “ex-gay” organizations are targeting mature adults who have absolutely nothing wrong with them. They are not mentally ill. This fact may have a lot more to do with the ineffectiveness of the “therapy” as anything else. Psychopaths are mentally ill, and (I am not a doctor) I believe pedophiles are as well. But, like pedophilia, being a psychopath is not a defense. > [@](#): > > I thought the theory was that many pedophiles had themselves been molested, and had sexualized the experience. Thus they tend to seek out victims who appear to be roughly the same age as they were, when they were attacked. This appears to be more “common wisdom” than the results of actual research. I know too many victims of sexual abuse who have never abused anyone to believe there is any particular link. In Charles Crumbs case, their father was a physically abusive bully (in the context of the time, a “strict disciplinarian”), but none of the Crumb brothers has ever accused him of sexual abuse. Charles was gay, and the first object of his sexual desire was a boy of the same age. From Robert and Charles’ writing he appears to not have matured out of it towards age-appropriate sexual attraction mostly due to abuse by peers, who beat him for asking a girl his own age out on a date. ---
**Author:** ![fuzzypickles](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/9d8465/32.png) [@fuzzypickles](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fuzzypickles)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2009, 5:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pedophiliacs-should-we-feel-sympathy-for-them/510462/37 "2009-09-18T05:35:51Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > I thought the theory was that many pedophiles had themselves been molested, and had sexualized the experience. Thus they tend to seek out victims who appear to be roughly the same age as they were, when they were attacked. I don’t think it’s possible to draw that correlation, since it’s estimated that [up to one-fourth of all children are sexually abused before the age of 18](http://www.darkness2light.org/KnowAbout/statistics_2.asp), and clearly not all of them grow up to be pedophiles. > [@gaffa](#): > > Psychopaths are mentally ill, and (I am not a doctor) I believe pedophiles are as well. But, like pedophilia, being a psychopath is not a defense. Technically speaking, psychopathy is a personality disorder, not a mental illness. The difference is that people with mental illness, such as bipolar disorder or schizophrenia, do not want to be mentally ill (with a few exceptions) whereas most psychopaths have no issue with being a psychopath. Many of them are even proud of it. I’m not sure where you’d place sexual disorders on that continuum – it’s been shown time and again that sexual identity is nearly impossible to change. ---
**Author:** ![Cesario](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ecae2f/32.png) [@Cesario](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cesario)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2009, 5:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pedophiliacs-should-we-feel-sympathy-for-them/510462/38 "2009-09-18T05:54:12Z")
> [@Jonathan\_Chance](#): > > So in this thread over [here](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=532345) we appear to be debating pedophiliac hypotheticals, God help us, and the question came up about ‘feeling sorry’ for those with such tendencies. Personally, I’ve never really grasped what benefit it was to have someone pity you. Maybe it’s just me. > [@Jonathan\_Chance](#): > > I admit, if my understanding of pedophilia is correct then I do feel a certain sympathy for people with these tendencies. If I understand correct, and please feel free to educate me, then the attraction to the underage as defined by pedophila is involuntary on the part of those who possess it. That is, this is the way their sexual attraction circuits are wired for whatever reason and they’re stuck with it. They could no more ‘unwire’ themselves than I could do so about being straight. This assessment would be accurate. > [@Jonathan\_Chance](#): > > And that does lead to a certain amount of ‘Dude, sucks to be you’ feeling on my part. In a world that’s gotten much more liberal about things sexual over the last 50 years they find themselves in a spot that has a bright white line drawn around it and they can never be allowed to follow their sexual instincts without being in danger of the law and being utterly ostracized by society. They must, forever, refrain from sexual activity that seems right to them. > > Heck, priests are committed to doing so but at least they made the decision consciously. It also deserves to be noted that those same liberalization advances came at the same time as a tightening of age of consent laws. Women getting to leave their homes and interact with men who weren’t family members? Used as justification for raising the age of consent from it’s historical levels up to the current levels. Homosexual rights? A favorite tool of those oposed to them was to create differing age of consent laws for different sex acts so that gays could be roped in on statutory rape charges. And of course, anyone who oposed those clearly discriminatory laws (particularly NAMBLA) was demonized as out “recruiting” children. > [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > Inasmuch as it may be hard wired then there is a “sucks to be you” thing here. > > That said some things go beyond feeling sorry for them. Some people who are exceptionally violent were made/born that way. Does not absolve them in the least bit for what they do to others. > > If someone knows they have pedo tendencies then it is incumbent upon them to seek help and do everything they can to not indulge in their particular attraction. Yeah, sucks for them but then people are born with all sorts of maladies and deformities and retardation and so on that sucks too. At least a pedo can presumably do something about it. If they don’t and indulge their perversion then I have zero sympathy. Do you exclusively adult attracted individuals really find **not raping people** to be such a difficult task that you need professional help to keep yourselves in check? If no, why do you assume that pedophiles are different? > [@Freudian\_Slit](#): > > I feel sorry for them, too, for having said urges. I know that I don’t always consciously act on my own urges. I’m a heterosexual female, FTR (so we’re not talking about accidentally/on purpose brushing up against the Sea World orcas), but when I’m around a guy I’m attracted to, I’m not consciously thinking, “I’m going to do xyz.” It’s more like…“Ooooh, he’s sexy,” and I find myself leaning against him, or lying against him, or finding an excuse to be physical. You should see someone about that impulse-control problem you’ve got. > [@Freudian\_Slit](#): > > Okay, obviously, there are settings where that’s totally unprofessional and not kosher even for a person attracted exclusively to adults. But it’s natural for flirtatious behavior to happen in some settings. And this self-justification isn’t really helping. > [@Freudian\_Slit](#): > > For a pedophile, though, it’s like you always have to be on guard. Personally, I’ve never found it to be that difficult. I worry that you seem to feel otherwise. > [@Freudian\_Slit](#): > > And since most pedophiles don’t necessarily violently rape the kid, it’s a lot harder–there are subtle grooming activities that you can do to make the kid think they’re really special or awesome and that this is normal. Wait, there’s something wrong with a kid thinking they’re special or awesome? 😕 So much for self-esteem. > [@Marley23](#): > > Sorry to nitpick, but the word is “pedophiles.” > > I’m not up to date on the psychological research here, but to whatever extent these people struggle with an attraction that’s beyond their control, yes, I feel sorry for them. Some of them seem to really do want to be rid of that attraction. Some were molested themselves, and it’s definitely sad that that can lead to a cycle of further abuse. > > But when they act on their impulses or offer justifications for them? Forget it. That’s a choice. And while some of them may have impulses they can’t control, it’s still possible to have bad impulses and be a piece of crap at the same time. It’s not a catchall excuse. And why must I descend into a cycle of self-hatrid in order to be something other than a piece of crap to you? Why is my self-acceptance so threatening in your eyes? Hint, low self-esteem is more associated with impulse-control problems. If you already think you’re scum, what reason do you have not to act like scum? > [@hotflungwok](#): > > So what kind of help can they get? Is there anything that can be done short of chemical castration? If it is actually inborn and not a condition, wouldn’t trying to change them be like trying to change a homosexual? > > I’ve never been able to figure out how pedophiles manage to contact each other. How do you even bring it up with another person? I can’t imagine a more reviled group, and admitting you were one would risk pretty much every bad thing a society can do to an individual. Telling people who are in a position to harm you is an act of extreme trust. So far, I’ve spoken of this to only two people in real life. In an anonymous medium like this, however, it is easier, since the people you’re telling aren’t in a position to harm you unless you do something stupid. > [@hotflungwok](#): > > Thankx to an incident close to my family, my attitude towards pedophiles is far past ‘zero sympathy’. Maybe this information will help: > [@](#): > > Not only are pedophiles unlikely to rape children (in the same way heterosexual males are unlikely to rape women), but statistical evidence has shown that nonpedophiles are more than twice as likely to molest children than pedophiles are. > > Don’t believe me? I don’t blame you. Here are the statistics. > > FBI sex offender expert Kenneth Lanning stated in a 2001 interview that “About 90 percent [of child molesters] are so-called “situational child molesters” who capitalize on opportunities to molest children but don’t necessarily prefer sex with children … The 10 percent of child molesters who make up the second category are the bona fide “pedophiles,” those who genuinely favor sex with children.” > > Here’s the link to the interview: > [Valley Advocate: Profile of a Pedophile](http://web.archive.org/web/20030621002758/http://old.valleyadvocate.com/articles/pedophile.html) > > Lanning’s figure is supported by various sources. Here is another source citing similar figures: > [http://www.martinfrost.ws/htmlfiles/nov2006/pedophile1.html#Occurrence\_in\_child\_sex\_offenders](http://www.martinfrost.ws/htmlfiles/nov2006/pedophile1.html#Occurrence_in_child_sex_offenders) > > Studies of adult arousability has shown that pedophiles make up as much as 20-33% of the adult male population. 20% is the lowest number I’ve seen, but I haven’t seen the actual study purporting this number. I have seen, and can link to the study purporting the 33% figure. > > [97-048 article](http://www.ipce.info/ipceweb/Library/97-048_article.html) > > For those uninterested in reading the whole article, it was done using a number of volunteers, and measuring their arousal using a device attached to the penis as they were shown different materials. While 85% showed some arousal to pedophilic stimuli, in 33% of their test subjects, the arousal equaled or exceeded the arousal to adult stimuli. > > Taking the conservative numbers together, the math works out as follows: > > Pedophile molesters 10% \< 90% Nonpedophile molesters > > Pedophiles 20% \< 80% Nonpedophiles > > 10/20 is then the proportion of pedophile molesters to pedophiles relative to the figure 90/80 that represents nonpedophile molesters to nonpedophiles > > 10/20 = .5 \< 1.125 = 90/80 > > The proportion thus is 1 to 2.25, making a given nonpedophile more than twice as likely to molest a child as a given pedophile. > [@Marley23](#): > > Based on other discussions on the SDMB, my understanding is that chemical castration isn’t a cure-all. It can help if the person doesn’t want to do it anymore, but it does not completely eliminate sexual desire and impulses. Overall I’m skeptical of the whole “they can’t help it” defense, just like I’m skeptical of claims that pedophiles are nearly guaranteed to reoffend. Agreed. It both declares that I’m destined to one day rape someone, and offers an excuse for doing it in the same breath. Not to mention the implication that, deprived of consensual partners, people are expected to resort to rape. > [@boytyperanma](#): > > I think its tragic. They, for whatever reason, are in a position that does not allow them to live out their sexual fantasies in a way that others can. > > I could care less what people fantasize about. If they want to beat off thinking about little Betty there is nothing ‘wrong’ about that to me. It’s equivalent to them doing so to Jenna Jamison or Janet Reno to me. Not my place to judge. > > I have no sympathy for those that actively partake or pursue fantasies in a way that abuses or exploits actual children. It is not ok with me for them to impact the lives of children. I would agree with this sentiment completely. > [@Freudian\_Slit](#): > > I think one of the reasons it’s so hard is because you can tell yourself if you’re not raping the kid, it’s okay. Obviously, it’s not okay to fondle or stroke a kid either, but I think there are a lot of mental justifications going on there. And there are a lot of blurry areas. This got me a lot of eye rolls from **Cesario** in the thread where he admitted his inclinations, but I think there are ways of making a kid uncomfortable out of attraction without necessarily molesting them. I know I’ve been in situations where a person has been attracted to me when I’ve been unable to reciprocate and it’s sort of creepy. I imagine it’s even more so when you add the power differential. You earned those eyerolls legitimately. If I can’t tell it’s happening, and the kid can’t tell it’s happening, and the parents who are watching the whole thing can’t tell it’s happening, in what sense can it be said to be happening at all? > [@Wesley\_Clark](#): > > If they have urges they don’t like and want to get help so they do not act on the urges, then yeah I feel sympathy for them. It would suck to feel compelled to do something as destructive and shameful as that. > > If you type in the phrase ‘child molestation prevention’ or ‘child molestation treatment’ the first website that comes up is > > [http://www.childmolestationprevention.org/](http://www.childmolestationprevention.org/) > > Which has info about where potential abusers can go for help and what kinds of help are available. So its not like help is impossible to find, 10 seconds on google leads you to the right place. So I feel sympathy, but in the age of information it isn’t too hard to get help if someone wants it and can admit to themselves that they need it. > > Closeted sexual abuse is the worst public health problem we have right now. It leads to a life that will likely be filled with (or at least prone to) emotional suffering, eating disorders, depression, anxiety, immune dysfunction, relationship problems, domestic violence, suicide attempts, etc. > > [http://www.childmolestationprevention.org/pages/tell\_others\_the\_facts.html](http://www.childmolestationprevention.org/pages/tell_others_the_facts.html) > > "Children seldom tell. Those millions of children are a secret. They are the secret in family after family after family. Even adult survivors of childhood sexual abuse seldom tell. What we do know from studies of adult men and women is that the number is at least three million. At least three million children are molested before they finish their 13th year. In 1998, there were 103,000 reported and confirmed cases of child molestation. For comparison, at the height of the polio epidemic that struck children in the 1950s, there were 21,000 cases reported in a year. For rubella, there were 57,000 cases reported. For child molestation, those numbers of reported and confirmed molestations are only the tip of the iceberg. For every case reported there are at least two and maybe three more cases that never get reported. > > That’s why we may never know the exact number of child victims. We do know that if we use the conservative estimate that two in every ten little girls and one in every ten little boys are victims (based on the population reported in the 1999 U.S. Census statistical abstract) well over three million children are victims. > > Take a moment to think about that. Three million children is a staggering number of children. That’s 46 National Football League stadiums packed with children who are, today, being sexually abused, and who believe they have no adult to go to for help." Ugh, the shoddy work of Dr. Abel continues to inspire wrongheaded approaches to dealing with the situation. My thoughts on anyone who would treat her statistics as gospel: > [@](#): > > “An estimated 88% of child molesters and 95% of molestations (one person, multiple acts) are committed by individuals who now or in the future will also meet criteria for pedophilia. Pedophilic child molesters on average commit 10 times more sexual acts against children than nonpedophilic child molesters.” > > The above statistics appear quite damning at first glance. Still, like many things in life, the first glance can be misleading. I decided to track down the source of these alarming statistics. At length, I found that they could all be traced back to a single study published in 2001 by one Gene G. Abel and one Nora Harlow. > > [http://www.childmolestationprevention.org/pdfs/study.pdf](http://www.childmolestationprevention.org/pdfs/study.pdf) > > Among its findings, as could be expected from the above statistics is, “Pedophilia is the most significant cause of child molestation.” > > This is in stark contrast to such statements as those of of FBI sex offender expert Kennith Lanning, which state that the exact inverse is true. Until I actually located Abel’s study, I had no means of reconciling this apparent contradiction, but with it, locating the source of the discrepency was easy. > > The word “pedophile” when used as a psychiatric term, reffers to an adult who is primarily sexually attracted to children. Dr. Abel, however, chose to redefine the term for the purposes of her study. Rather than reffer to people who’s primary sexual attraction is directed toward children, Dr. Abel took the term to reffer to people who had engaged in sexual behaviors with children. > > Because this obviously would have constituted 100% of her child molester population (by definition), Dr. Abel took the following corrective action, “To separate admitted child molesters who fit the pedophilic diagnostic criterion that behavior must have continued ‘for more than six months,’ we used length of time of the continuing behavior.” > > So in effect, what the 88% number Dr. Abel presented actually means (once one learns her unique definition for the word “pedophile”) is that 88% of **child molesters** molest children over a period greater than six months. The 95% figure indicates that 95% of child molestations are commited by individuals who are molesting children over a period of gerater than six months. The 10 times figure, thus tells us that child molesters who molest children over a time period greater than six months commit, on average, 10 times the number of sex acts as child molesters who’s activities last a period shorter than six months. > > In short, Dr. Abel’s statistics have absolutely nothing to do with pedophilia. Rather Dr. Abel has demonstrted through her study that child molesters who molest for greater than six months tend to perform more molestations than child molesters who molest for less than six months, and that child molesters, in the vast majority do molest children for a period longer than six months. ---
**Author:** ![Cesario](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ecae2f/32.png) [@Cesario](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cesario)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2009, 5:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pedophiliacs-should-we-feel-sympathy-for-them/510462/39 "2009-09-18T05:55:39Z")
> [@Honesty](#): > > I feel almost ashamed to admit it but, yes, I feel sorry for them - insofar - that they have these unquenchable urges but the pity stops there. This is not a society that allows for adult-minor relationships nor should it be. > > As much as I support convicted pedophiles going to jail, There is no such thing as a convicted pedophile. Pedophilia is not a crime. Child molestation is a crime, but thinking little kids are hot is not illegal. > [@Honesty](#): > > I believe, deep down, that these people belong in psychiatric wards not in jail cells. These people need to learn how to integrate into society without humping on a toddler that strolls by. People who can’t manage that have a massive impulse-control disorder that has nothing to do with pedophilia. > [@Honesty](#): > > I don’t know if its possible to reverse pedophilia in a psychiatric setting, but it has to be better than jail, where the certainty of them committing the crime again is all but certain. Personally, I would chose death over that kind of mind-rape. > [@Honesty](#): > > Americans will have to make a painful shift from looking at pedophiles as monsters to human beings who have been aberrantly wired. I don’t think this will happen in our lifetime. It is unfortunate because research in this area is scarce. For more information on why it’s scarce, you might want to look up the Rind et. al, contravercy. > [@Honesty](#): > > Would be pretty cool to find that a pill could reverse or, at least, blunt some of these behaviors. I do support the idea pharmacologically or surgically manipulating pedophiles so that they won’t have a sex drive but I don’t know all of the ramifications of it. > > It’s certainly a sticky subject and wish there were easy answers. Very thought-provoking thread. Doping me up for the rest of my life, lobotomizing me, yeah, I stand by my “I chose death” stance. > [@omgzebras](#): > > I don’t imagine you have any more choice about it than somebody who is gay. Or straight, for that matter. You’re wired how you’re wired. As long as they understand that their preferred sexual encounter necessarily involves rape and so ensure that they never act on their urges, I do feel sorry for them. What a miserable way to have to go through the world. > > When they try to rationalize that ‘well, under this set of circumstances it might be ok,’ or, ‘if the child is mature for their age,’ or something like that, I stop feeling sorry for them and start to worry that they’re starting down the path of a child predator. In other words, so long as they don’t ever contemplate the possibility that our current, mutually contradictory, arbitrary age lines based on nothing are anything but divinely ordained perfection, they retain your sympathies. Got it. > [@Freudian\_Slit](#): > > Yeah, some of **Cesario** ’s posts about how it’s society that infantilizes kids and how some kids are mature Considering the amount of effort people spend keeping kids ignorant and artificially extending childhood well past its biological and historical norm, is there really an argument to be made against the idea that society infantalizes kids? You may argue that it’s a good thing for society to do, but to argue that it doesn’t do it? > [@Freudian\_Slit](#): > > and he wouldn’t stop a six year old who had already started going down on me skeeve the hell out of me. The whole point of stopping the kid is to prevent harm. If all the harm that’s going to be done has already been done, that motivation doesn’t work anymore. > [@John\_Mace](#): > > My thoughts, exactly. Imagine if we “normal” people could never have sexual relations of any kind with another consenting adult of our choice. Take a cold shower? Sooner or later, something is likely to give. And this is why repression and self-hatrid is a bad idea. > [@Freudian\_Slit](#): > > Not just sexual relations, though. Any physical contact. I mean, sometimes you just want to be close to someone you’re attracted to…for a hug, or a cuddle. I can’t imagine being unable to do anything like that to someone I felt turned on by. It’s like every single time you come in physical proximity to the object of your desire, you’re going to be magnifying its importance because you can’t have it. I just love how the exact same act, which is perfectly innocent and harmless for everyone else, suddenly becomes a soul-destroying act of abuse when someone thinks slightly different thoughts while doing it. > [@Pazu](#): > > I agree. After all, most of us agree that “abstinence-only” isn’t a very realistic expectation, but that’s pretty much what we tell pedophiles to do. > > Not that I would feel particularly comfortable having one around my kids unsupervised, but I do feel sorry for their situation. Considering that nonpedophiles are more than twice as likely to molest kids… > [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > Guaranteed? No. But recidivism rates are rather high just the same and the danger posed continues for a long time: Interesting. How do these numbers compare to other offenders? Violent offenders? Nonviolent offenders? “Normal” rapists? > [@gonzomax](#): > > Some of them had consensual teenage sex. And some of them had to pee in an area devoid of public restrooms. > [@aldiboronti](#): > > I have no sympathy for them at all. Maybe they can’t help the way they’re wired. But they can certainly help whether they act on those urges. That’s the bottom line. If they allow their lust for kids to outweigh their common humanity then they have forfeited any right to sympathy. And those of us who don’t touch kids? > [@Shodan](#): > > This, with the caveat that I don’t know that pedophiles are born that way (if that is what you meant by “wired”). It is not wrong to feel that way. It is wrong to act on it, ever. It’s wrong to harm a child. I’m not prepared to agree until I know the extent of your definition of “act on it”, since at some point, I seem to recall a standard that would prevent me from going to a grocery store because I’d _gasp_ look at kids there (since looking at the is unavoidable if you want to avoid a colision, which said individual would describe as even worse (if that’s possible)). > [@Shodan](#): > > And I can do without the self-serving rhetoric about how you are doing it because you are liberating children from the societal burden of “the age of consent” and helping them get in touch with their sensual natures and the rest of the horseshit. You are doing out of your needs, not theirs. Or more accurately, the needs of my ten year old self, who was feeling damn opressed at that point, and who resolved that no one should have to suffer like he did. > [@Shodan](#): > > And if you genuinely can’t help yourself, then we as a society need to take whatever steps are necessary to stop you. Yes, people with impulse control problems need to be prevented from causing harm. > [@Shodan](#): > > There are some things for which no excuse will suffice. If an adult molests a child, it doesn’t matter why he did it. The important fact is that he did it. One time is too many; therefore twice is an unacceptable risk. > > Regards, > Shodan Do you feel the same about adult rapists? > [@gaffa](#): > > What steps are acceptable and necessary? Personally, I think a budding pedophile like the young Charles Crumb might have been re-oriented if his orientation had been identified early enough, in the same way that [young psychopaths have been successfully identified via fMRI](http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/11/10/081110fa_fact_seabrook?printable=true) before engaging in anti-social activities that harm others. But I suspect that might involve national health care. It might also involve a war. There isn’t a lot that’d motivate me to kill, and very little that would motivate me to risk dying, especially for total strangers, but preventing brainwashing like this would be one of those things. I don’t believe I am alone in that assessment. > [@Shodan](#): > > I thought the theory was that many pedophiles had themselves been molested, and had sexualized the experience. Thus they tend to seek out victims who appear to be roughly the same age as they were, when they were attacked. Or else are incredibly immature emotionally, like Michael Jackson appeared to be. > > Regards, > Shodan This has not been my experience, nor has it been the experience of pretty much any of the pedophiles or molestation victims I’ve spoken with. Still, I admit my evidence is anecdotal, and would gladly conceed if presented with a valid academic source. ---
**Author:** ![AboutAsWeirdAsYouCanGet](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/22d042/32.png) [@AboutAsWeirdAsYouCanGet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AboutAsWeirdAsYouCanGet)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2009, 7:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pedophiliacs-should-we-feel-sympathy-for-them/510462/40 "2009-09-18T07:28:46Z")
> [@](#): > > So what kind of help can they get? Is there anything that can be done short of chemical castration? If it is actually inborn and not a condition, wouldn’t trying to change them be like trying to change a homosexual? > > I’ve never been able to figure out how pedophiles manage to contact each other. How do you even bring it up with another person? I can’t imagine a more reviled group, and admitting you were one would risk pretty much every bad thing a society can do to an individual. I wonder, if a lot of them are stunted emotionally, and that’s why they feel sexually attracted to children. It really does seem like a lot of them for whatever reason never made the maturity leap to being attracted to adults. I also thought that the percentage of “pure” pedos was very low. I could have sworn that I read most pedos had extremely complicated emotional issues. It’s possible that a psych could help a pedo mature, emotionally so they wouldn’t be attracted to kids any more. I honestly think that its being emotionally stunted which is the root cause of peodphillia. There used to be some online messageboards. The only reason I know about them is b/cI was doing some reading on the book " I Know My First Name Is Steven" ,which in turn led me to Better a Millstone which then had links to the online messageboards. I used to lurk at them…Many of them were kind of ambigious…(ie attracted to young teens) but some of them… [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pedophiliacs-should-we-feel-sympathy-for-them/510462.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pedophiliacs-should-we-feel-sympathy-for-them/510462.md?page=3)