to think being a paedophile isn't a crime?

[KissingFish]

I see posts from people both on here and other places (Facebook) about how paedophiles should all be killed and confusing the terms paedophile and child molester / child abuser.

They're not the same thing and honestly I don't think being a paedophile is a crime. It is a sexual orientation that nobody chooses to be born with. The same way people are born straight or gay.

Just because someone is a paedophile it doesn't mean they have acted on it and so it doesn't mean they are a child molester.

Surely if we all accepted that paedophilia is a sexual orientation we could help these people before they commit a crime. Before they act on it. I bet there are a LOT more paedophiles out there than we know about. They just don't act on it because they know it's wrong to act on it.

I am of course not saying being sexually attracted to children is a good thing or that it should ever be OK to act on it. No way. Just that I don't think people choose to be a paedophile and it must be pretty scary to realise you are attracted to children. Much the same way it used to be about being gay. And I don't imagine you can just ask friends, family or many people actually for help and advice.

I think in order to deal with a problem you need to understand it first.

I am willing to be convinced otherwise though if anyone has a good argument?

Disclaimer: I am not a paedophile, I just don't believe they are all evil.

I wouldn't call in an orientation. I don't believe anyone is born a pedophile. However, I generally think it's a psychological disorder that stems from sexual, physical or emotional abuse. And much like a person who is bio-polar or has depression, it's not something you can just "turn- off" because it's illegal or wrong.

I've read a few things about it and the general gist is that not much is known about what causes it or how it can be treated because it's so taboo (rightly so). In the US if you even tell a psychiatrist or a psychologist that you have these feelings they are supposed to report you to the police as a potential offender and you can end upon the sex offenders list. While I don't necessarily disagree with that course of action from a mother's perspective, I don't see how it helps pedophiles come forward and seek help before they commit a crime.

I think major psychological studies have to be done, a morally dicey as that may seem, so a course of therapy and identification can be created.

On the one hand the OP says it's a sexual orientation that can't be helped, on the other it says that if it's treated this way then we can try to help them?

On the one hand the OP says it's a sexual orientation that can't be helped, on the other it says that if it's treated this way then we can try to help them?

^^This. How many homosexuals have been 'cured' by therapy? Paedophilia is an illness not a sexual orientation, as a pp said, often set in motion by an abusive childhood. The trouble is that many paedophiles believe that if they don't physically act on their instinct they are doing nothing wrong, however in just creating a demand by viewing images they are causing a huge amount of harm. I agree with your sentiment though op - you can't deal with something if you shove your fingers in your ears and say "la la la I'm not listening".

Maryz I think you misunderstood me. You're saying that we should make treatment available. I am saying there is no evidence treatment works. You said that currently such treatment is only tested on offenders and could work on pedophiles before they offend. I said that the outcome of the treatment - to stop them being attracted to children- is the same so why would treatment work any better for non offenders than offenders.

Basically, I disagree that just because there has been little testing of treatment on non offenders that this means it has any chance of working better on them

This thread is bizarre and infuriating. It is very telling that the main poster to be repeatedly deleted is lily. I can only assume for being abusive, attacking and from what I can see, downright dangerously twisting other posters' words.

Maryz, all of your posts have been bang on, and itsallfine, you have been treated appallingly. It is ridiculous that accusations have been bandied about that the op and people who agree with him/her are actually a bunch of peeeedos, trying to infiltrate mn, and implying that child sex abuse is acceptable and doesn't cause any harm. Nowhere can I see anyone having said that.

The point of the op was clear - that not all paedophiles are criminals, and there should be access to treatment/therapy for individuals who recognise these traits in themselves, and want to be rid of them and helped not to act on them.

I do take issue with paedophilia being a sexual orientation, rather it is a deviant sexual preference (imo). I don't believe that the thoughts thrmselves can be helped if they are there, but that obviously these people have the choice whether to act on them or not, and if they do, regardless to what level, at that point they become a child sex abuser.

I do think that pps who pointed out that not all child sex abusers are paedophiles is correct.

All the above said, certain posters have clearly tried to shut down reasoned discussion, however I am glad to see that mnhq have had the good sense to ignore this and allow it to continue, while deleting the personal attacks and ludicrous posts.

Pretty much everything that WhereTheFuck just said.

"On the one hand the OP says it's a sexual orientation that can't be helped, on the other it says that if it's treated this way then we can try to help them?"

My interpretation of the OP was not that it "can't be helped" in the sense that no treatment or therapy would be possible, more that it "can't be helped" in that nobody wakes up one morning and decides "right, I'm going to be a paedophile and fancy kids" and many people with these thoughts about children find them intrusive and distressing. In the radio programme I referred to waaaaaaaaay upthread (when I was being accused of posting paedo propaganda ) the teenage subject of the programme was horrified and ashamed at his own thoughts and wanted help not just not to start abusing kids but to stop himself looking at images of abuse or thinking these thoughts obsessively. I don't know what form that help should ideally take, obviously.

Paedophilia has to be recognised as 'something'
Even experts and those who have done extensive studies don't always agree on the 'cause'
One thing is for sure though, nothing can be done about it if you come at it from a point of anger and a stubborn refusal to look at all possibilities.
No one apart from a paedophile thinks it is ok to have sex with a child and even many paedophiles would not think it is ok.

There is talk of it being a psychological or even a neurological disorder. If so, then it is not a 'choice' a person makes. It is the effect of a particular disorder just like other brain disorders cause different effects.

There is no doubt that children are harmed both physically and mentally by being abused. They must be protected but to be honest, I don't see how getting angry and losing your temper over it helps them or anyone else.
Calm down! We know it is horrendous and no one on this thread approves of it. Solutions are found through considering all possibilities and by dedicated people studying the issue.
No one on this thread knows enough about the subject. It will never be solved through emotional outbursts.

Interesting thread. Thanks, OP, and many other posters.

I used to take the view that you can't help who you fancy, but you sure as hell shouldn't be acting on it unless everyone involved is a consenting adult. And I've argued the OP's point that paedophile is not the same as child abuser many times before: the abuser by definition acts, and makes a conscious choice to do so, and that's why it's a crime. On a theoretical level, while I wouldn't want a paedophile who'd never acted on his urges to be anywhere near my child, I'd have some sympathy (from a safe distance). But now I'm wondering, is there any such thing?

Throughout this thread I've been pondering, and now I'm not so sure whether my abuser was a paedophile per se. In common parlance, where paedophile means kiddy-fiddler, then yes, he is. But does he have an attraction to children? Given his wife and his predilection for female children I'm pretty sure his orientation is straight. But I still don't know what motivated him - lust? control? power? - to make the decision to act on whatever the hell was going on in his head. I never will know. But this thread has given me chance to think through some of the possibilities, which is always helpful.

We know there are a metric fuckton of child abusers out there. I doubt any reasonable person is in favour of normalising and legitimising their actions. But actual bona fide paedophiles, who find children sexually attractive? We have no idea how many, if any, such people are around. And we can't even begin to find out if the evil p-word continues to provoke such hysteria. And that pisses me off, because as a survivor I want to be able to understand what was done to me and why. Calls to kill all the peedos, on the other hand, aren't just unhelpful, they can actually make survivors feel worse. Because it's all about the hysterical mob's anger and desire for retribution, and because I have enough to deal with without having someone's blood on my conscience too.

And one last thing, in case lily is still reading: If you haven't actually been abused yourself, could you please fuck right off with the speaking for survivors and proclaiming to all and sundry about how you think we're affected? I wasn't yet three years old the first time I was orally raped, and I didn't vomit, and I wasn't physically damaged by it. It still happened, it still had a major psychological effect on me. But according to you forcing small children to perform oral sex causes vomiting and physical harm: do you know what a survivor's brain can do with that sentence?

I didn't vomit. I wasn't physically harmed. Why didn't I vomit? What's wrong with me? Perhaps I wasn't forced. Perhaps that's why I didn't vomit. I must have gone along with it willingly. It was my fault.

If this thread has taught me anything it's that for many people when they see or hear the word paedophile their brains switch to rage mode and they are incapable of comprehending anything outside of their rage. They even lose the ability to read.

We need to learn more to find out what causes there might be and whether it might be possible to develop treatments. The thing is, lots of people don't want this to happen. They want the problem to be invisible.

My mum, who is a devout Catholic, was telling me about a priest whom we always knew was 'dodgy' (please bear with me regarding the 'dodgy', as this was in the late 70s when I was a teenager and he ran the local disco), it transpired that he was indeed grooming children, specifically young pre teen boys. The solution was not to offer him help, but to swiftly take him out of the parish and send him elsewhere, a backwater, where no one would complain. Just dreadful. The man clearly needed support and help, but all he got was a minor slap on the wrist and a validation of his activities of sort.

I hope this doesn't come across patronising in any way as i most certainly only mean it in the nicest sense of appreciation but fingles and freerange I think have perhaps offered the most helpful contributions to this type of discussion which I as a parent feel needs to be had in the hope of protecting children better.

The point about it being about power and control that's what sexually gratifies pedophiles and perhaps not that they are simply attracted to children for attractions sake is an incredibly interesting recent point bought to the thread

The point about it being about power and control that's what sexually gratifies pedophiles and perhaps not that they are simply attracted to children for attractions sake is an incredibly interesting recent point bought to the thread

It is interesting, yes, however, it is a theory, and one that has been or is being studied. No one on here is qualified to say what the reason for paedophilia is. Even experts don't know.
We make up our own theories based on our own fears and ideas.

I suspect power and control sexually gratifies some abusers but not all - the guy in the radio show I heard just sounded more .... developmentally "stuck", like he was afraid to develop sexual relationships with peers and instead had "crushes" on small children that progressed to sexual feelings. But as Gotta says, we don't really know.

Fingles, great post.

I have to disagree with one point though, you cannot separate the physical from the psychological. Physical damage will damage the psyche and also vice versa.

Very interesting thread. I don't think it's an orientation - it's a dysfunction and has no parallels at all with homosexuality. The latter involves consenting adults.
I think paedophiles would absolutely love it if people started suggesting it is an orientation- that's the first step towards acceptance, and feeling sorry for them in some ways. It is little comfort that their are many paedophiles out their who don't act on it when so many do.

If we do see it as power and control, rather than an 'orientation' - which clearly we all agree it is not - then perhaps it is possible to treat it with careful counselling and CBT therapy, within secure units. It should be mandatory for all those who sexually abuse children.

Yes my post highlighting it would perhaps be worded 'a recent theory bought to the thread'

Though I was just now wondering why pedophiles don't extend to perhaps severely disabled people or animals if it was solely to do with power and control

Also interesting theory that someone could be developmentally stuck and never matured in their sexuality

Wow, what a thread. If ever there was an example of how people on MN don't RTFT properly this is it. There seems to have been two completely separate conversations here, with certain posters reading what they want to from people's posts rather than you know, the actual words. But aside from the constant attempts at derailing, it's been an interesting discussion.

The burn the witch scene from monty python and the holy grail is something that is springing to mind here.

Meant to say be better worded...

Sorry

Meant to say be better worded...

Sorry

accepting it as a mental illness is a horrific idea, it would grant peadophiles protection as an excelent post by a pp pointed out, anti discrimination laws could mean peadophiles could get jobs in schools, or like the recent cases of rolf harris etc, granted leniency in prosecution.

Not patronising, don't worry.

I think it's entirely possible that there are some people who are sexually attracted to children, because I can see how it could happen. Someone upthread mentioned hormones and attraction kicking in during the teenage years. Before that happens we view other people in a rather more innocent way, and when it does happen it's usually our peers we're attracted to, age wise. And as we age, the age range of peers we're attracted to ages too. But when you've been introduced to sex at a very early age, sex becomes one of the lenses through which you view people at an early age too (if that makes sense; I fear I'm not being as articulate as I'd like here). You're aware of sex, you're looking at your peers and thinking about sex and trying to work it all out, and those peers are fellow five year olds.

I'm just thinking out loud here and could be way off the mark. But it seems quite logical to me that the mechanism by which one continues to fancy one's peers despite you and them ageing could go wrong. If that were the case, then the person in question would be deserving of help and support and the opportunity to build a safe and fulfulling life well away from small children, because they haven't (at this point) committed any crime, they've just been damaged in some way.

But then you look at rape stats and whatnot, and come to the depressing conclusion that this is very probably in most instances about exactly the same thing: power and control, and if we want to look at what we can do to prevent that, I think we'd do well to aim for a major cultural shift. The same culture that practically gives men a free pass to rape adults does the same for those who'd like to rape children. Break the back of rape culture and I suspect we'd see rather less child abuse of this nature too.

why pedophiles don't extend to perhaps severely disabled people or animals if it was solely to do with power and control

Certainly there are people with those types of "fetishes*. My DH is in internet/information security, and as a result has spent time on the "dark net" and he says animal porn, particularly porn in which animals are hurt or killed, is just as common as child porn.