(Please excuse if this multiposts, I’m having a hard time telling if the hamsters are speaking to me here.)
It seems to me that “homosexual” is a word suggesting that an attraction is based in part on a particular sex; “paedophile” is a word suggesting that an attraction is based in part on a particular age.
My understanding is that most paedophiles do not have a sex preference. In other words, that if they prey upon a particular sex more often, it is due to different levels of ready access to children, and thus “homosexual” and “heterosexual” are not valid terms; there is no basis in their selection based upon the sex of the victim.
In a case where a person is selecting victims both on the basis of sex and on the basis of age, then I think both descriptors could be used accurately (whether heetero- or homo- as appropriate); however, as I said, it is my understanding that paedophiles in general do not have a sex preference, just different levels of availability.
I think that means I either agree with everyone or disagree with everyone. Or both.
If this is true, then I agree that neither “hetero-” or “homosexual” would be accurate terms for those type of pedophiles.
But I don’t agree this is true as a general proposition. Rather, I ahev always understood that while there are a not-insubstantial number of molestors who will attack children of either sex, most molestors have either a heterosexual or homosexual preference in their choice of child victims.
I would certainly appreciate anyone with actual knowledge (and a cite) to show up and either confirm my impression or disabuse me of my mistaken notion.
In either event, a heterosexual molestor would still be the accurate term for one who preys on children of the opposite sex, and a homosexual molestor one who preys on chidlren of the same sex – regardless of the rarity or commonality of their existence.
Bricker, FWIW (this would be only an anecdotal cite, not an academic one), the pedophiles I have known (yes, unfortunately, there’s a reason that word is plural) have not taken to looking for any specific physical characteristics in the children they molested. They really only cared about getting caught.
That said, RickJay’s comments here speak to some things I’m sure you’ll be interested in. 'bout a third of the way down the page … it’s his first post on that page.
RickJay’s summary of Marshall’s research is excellent.
But since it was crafted to rebut the proposition that men who are homosexual in their adult orientation are more likely to molest boys, it’s not precisely relevant to my point – since I am already in hearty agreement with that proposition.
To review, the summary linked above is:
This actually confirms what I said above: Rather, I ahev [sic] always understood that while there are a not-insubstantial number of molestors who will attack children of either sex, most molestors have either a heterosexual or homosexual preference in their choice of child victims. Molestors who are heterosexual in their adult orientation are predominantly attracted to pre-pubescent boys.
Actually, I didn’t create the definition. I got it by observing the arguments from other posters on the boards here. Particularly iampunha* and Polycarp, among others. The argument holds up on its own internal logic without having to resort to outside cites. Yeah, “common usage” dictates otherwise, but common usage would also define “homosexual” as “someone who’s going to hell,” so I don’t put a lot of stock in common usage.