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.

Maryz: I expect sensible discussion

I expect those who preach to practice what they preach.

"They would be breaking the law, surely that should a deterrent."

The impression I get is that for some people it's a strong compulsion, in the same way that pyromaniacs set fires/kleptomaniacs steal/addicts take drugs even though they're breaking the law. Would you suggest that nobody should be provided with addiction counselling and services because "it's illegal, that should be enough to stop you"?

JJXM - thank you for sharing that

I agree with you that 1) money is better spent on treatment for the victims than the perpetrators. And 2) a paedophile is just someone who hasn't offended yet, or been caught.

The proliferation of child abuse images online is indicative of the scale of this problem - and that there are a huge number of paedophiles who do act on their impulses. We have no way of knowing the number who don't act. These images are not stumbled across, they are actively sought out. They are also not victimless - that is a real child really being abused. To call it 'child porn' is a horrible minimisation - and the sentencing for viewing such images/video is shamefully lax.

The experts don't know "much"- although far more than you or I.

The experts have found there is no evidence that any of that is effective. Why do you keep insisting that it's something we should be doing?

Do you not see the conflict between these two statements? Surely the experts seeking to know more would be useful, even if ultimately it leads us up a blind alley.

Maryz So if it is genetic, and a profile could be given in utero, would you abort the foetus genetically profiled to be a paedophile?

Is the obvious conclusion...

If something being against the law is a sufficient deterrent why are our prisons overflowing?

No one was discussing women being attracted to older men. The subject was not about people over the age of consent, that was simply, your interpretation of it

Discussion P37, Elendon & Fingle. Talking about why women are not attracted to teenage boys and men being attracted to younger females. I was simply giving a theory for why this is so.

Maryz: it does seem that much of human behaviour is genetically related

Ah, you really have painted yourself into a corner with this statement.

It's society and it's nurture that brings about human behaviour. It's not nature.

mh issues, for autism, for depression

That's low. Scraping the barrel there.

Of course people choose to murder etc- think about gangs. Gang members who murder are not (all) mentally ill. Murder isn't just about voices in your head telling you to bludgeon someone.

as for support until there is a form which is proven to work it's tricky. Any kind of "confinement"- putting them all in a locked facility where they can't access children or computers would prevent those people abusing but will also mean they are sharing fantasies with like minded people and God only knows how that would end. Talking therapy could simply allow an abuser to fool more people into believing they are not active. CBT doesn't work for this sort of thing. Medication and castration have been shown not to work. Supervision and monitoring is about the best we can do now. So there is the option that a pedophile who isn't a child abuser (IF they exist) could report themselves for lifelong monitoring and supervision.

Personally, I think use the term child porn is something to be avoided- it is normalisation of something abhorrent. It's not that difficult to type IIOC or online child sex abuse images, is it?

MNetters complained to the BBC recently for use of the term, and the BBC changed it I believe.

It's society and it's nurture that brings about human behaviour. It's not nature

Surely the prevailing thought now is that it's a mix of both, and one influences the other?

Nurture has been shown to be incredibly important in psychopath studies. It's really interesting actually.

They have identified the psychopathic personality gene - and found that nurture will decide whether this is 'triggered' or not. ie. neglect/abuse is likely to trigger it, very nurturing, loving family - they will still have the gene, and the tendency, be a bit 'odd,' if you like - but it won't manifest itself in damaging behaviour against others.

Apparently, those in prison for murder all have this gene.

I don't understand Elenden's post either, surely it's widely recognized that there's a genetic component to some mental health/behavioural issues? I suffered from bad PND after DS1 was born, was told one of the risk factors was a family history of depression (my father has suffered badly in the past, as did other members of his family). Clearly I have a genetic predisposition to depression, though that predisposition was only "switched on", as it were, under particular circumstances.

(also obviously I am not equating sexual attraction to children with PND....)

Of course people choose to murder etc- think about gangs. Gang members who murder are not (all) mentally ill. Murder isn't just about voices in your head telling you to bludgeon someone

People DO 'choose' to do bad things. However, their choice is determined by many things. People who have been in gangs have and do turn their lives around. They usually do this after receiving some help or finding a different way to live.
What you do is often the result of your upbringing or emotional damage suffered when young.
We are ALL the result of what was done to us in the past, even if it is insecurity or jealousy or fear. The difference being that the result of our damage is not as awful as the damage caused by peadophiles/child abusers and murderers. by the same token - some people do wonderful things because of the positive influence their upbringing has had.

Agree, Under, the phrase 'child porn' should be banned.

Meerka, no the prevailing thought for deviant behaviour is nurture now. Thankfully.

My third child is autistic, he did not become autistic because of how he was raised ('formally' diagnosed at 4 years, the previous 3 and a half getting there).

underthegreenwoodtree yes I read something about this once and there was the idea that all children who had parents in prison for violent crimes should be monitored through school to ensure similar traits don't emerge. I should imagine social services try to do this anyway but whether it happens on a regular basis seems doubtful

Anyway, we coming to the end of this thread, which has been interesting and in the main, a civilised discussion.

Thanks to all for the conversation.