Pedophilia

[Pokeshippers]

What is it that makes pedophilia a mental disorder? I'm genuinely curious. I've heard pedophilia described as a mental disorder before but never in a way that makes it seems like anything other than a way to demonize pedophilia. Why is it a mental disorder more than any other uncommon sexuality?

I don't even know how to get started to be honest. Whilst it may not be recognized as a mental disorder, and may indeed be a demonization it seems pretty damn uncommon to become sexually interested in children, even babies, to rape and molest them. I think it's moreso the fact that someone would try to have sex with something which hasn't reached sexual maturity, nor mental maturity to understand what's happening and whilst Rape and Pedophillia are technically two different things, it still requires some screwed up thought processes to steal a childs innocence like that, though I will admit, perhaps calling it a mental illness is to far, but to lump it in with perfectly normal sexualities (heterosexuality, homosexuality and asexuality) seems to be almost insulting towards them.

 

[CSolarstorm]

The internet is your friend, everyone. Don't just guess, don't just assume - do your research!

About whether or not it's okay if the child says yes -

What we are looking for here is not just 'consent' but 'informed consent'. 'Informed consent' is the only real acceptable form of consent, because all people, especially children, make impulsive decisions out of naivete without having the experience to ask the necessary questions to look out for their own self interests, their own happiness, before they give consent. Unless someone gives informed consent, inevitably they will end up feeling like they've been tricked into doing something nobody told them they wouldn't like. For example, if you think that it's okay for an adult to have sex with a prepubescent child as long as the child says yes, would you be okay with a third grader being hired for a job as long as the third grader says yes? Do you think they should be held accountable to the contracts they sign, even though the contracts are written by lawyers at a high-school graduate level while the third grader is still reading short chapter books? Prepubescent children are not on the same level as sexually developed adults. This is a fact. And they cannot make informed decisions with sexually developed adults, because they lack that emotional and sexual understanding about those kind of relationships.

Some children show a lot more maturity than others, and even understand more about sex than many teenagers do. But the reason these children catch our attention and we call them 'beyond their years' is because they are the exception to the rule. It's not fair tailoring laws to the majority of children based on these particularly mature kids.

About why pedophilia is a disorder -

The simplest answer is that it presents a risk factor to its subject, children. Homosexuality, in comparison does not present a risk factor to its subject, the same sex.

If a person is attracted to children but never feels the need to act on it, then many people do not consider them pedophiles. On the other, there is a proposition going around to remove 'pedophile' label from the list of disorders and uses it to describe those who are not sexually active with children, but say that people who actually molest children have 'pedophilic disorder'.

Additionally, there are other symptoms connected to the disorder, such as a social disability in the form of not connecting with adults and being more comfortable with children as company because their development is at a stunted level comparable with a child. Sometimes people who developmentally delayed never really mature beyond a certain point in their childhood, so they look to kids instead of adults to fill the role of their friends and sexual partner, making them at more risk for molesting kids. I've actually had this happen close to me by people that I care for.

The real information here is really complex and has a lot of ins and out and exceptions, and I see a lot of people reaching really disappointing conclusions because they want to make these clean, straightfoward categories that are completely ridiculous. Don't come into a discussion if it's too much work for you to research it and learn the ins and out of it! This is just common sense in any discussion.

 

[Grey Wind]

Seriously, what does masturbation have to do with pedophilia?

marioguy has to get his sex-ed somewhere.

There is such thing as a gay or straight pedophile. Pedophilia is a mental disorder and the man or womans sexual preference determines what gender of child they prefer.

Not necessarily. Plenty of paedophiles are attracted to both sexes in children, while they're attracted to only one sex in adults. Plenty of otherwise straight men have molested young boys, and likewise for other cases. It's mostly an attraction to children as a whole, rather than a certain sex of a child.

Don't see what relevance bring up the orientation of a paedophile is at all.

What is it that makes pedophilia a mental disorder? I'm genuinely curious. I've heard pedophilia described as a mental disorder before but never in a way that makes it seems like anything other than a way to demonize pedophilia. Why is it a mental disorder more than any other uncommon sexuality?

SunnyC cleared this up pretty well on the first page:

"As a medical diagnosis, pedophilia, or paedophilia, is defined as a psychiatric disorder in persons who are 16 years of age or older typically characterized by a primary or exclusive sexual interest in prepubescent children"

"The International Classification of Diseases (ICD) defines pedophilia as a "disorder of adult personality and behaviour" in which there is a sexual preference for children of prepubertal or early pubertal age.[6] According to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), it is a paraphilia in which a person has intense and recurrent sexual urges towards and fantasies about prepubescent children and on which feelings they have either acted or which cause distress or interpersonal difficulty.[1]"

To make it clear again:
The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders defines pedophilia as a disorder.
The International Classification of Diseases defines pedophilia as a disease.

And, uh, what do you mean by "demonise paedophiles"? There's no demonising about it. Yeah, I do feel sympathy for a paedophile who has to live with his disorder and can't let it out and whatnot, but diagnosing something as a disorder is in no way trying to demonise somebody.

 

[CSolarstorm]

Yeah, I do feel sympathy for a paedophile who has to live with his disorder and can't let it out and whatnot, but diagnosing something as a disorder is in no way trying to demonise somebody.

In addition, it's not as if psychologists are the enemy here. Consider the idea that maybe psychologists can help more pedophiles be those kind of people that we respect, the kind of pedophiles that are intelligent and mature enough to be no more likely to molest a child than anyone else.

But how are they going to do that if pedophilia is no longer a diagnosis? Just practically.

 

[Soldierer]

SunnyC cleared this up pretty well on the first page:

And, uh, what do you mean by "demonise paedophiles"? There's no demonising about it. Yeah, I do feel sympathy for a paedophile who has to live with his disorder and can't let it out and whatnot, but diagnosing something as a disorder is in no way trying to demonise somebody.

Yeah I know pedophilia is diagnosed as a disorder and a disease, but my question is why? When homosexuality was less accepted by society it was also diagnosed as a disorder or a disease. It wasn't until homosexuals began opening up to a more accepting and more liberal culture that homosexuality was delisted as a disorder/disease. In other words there's a strong correlation between whether homosexuality is diagnosed as a disorder/disease and society's tolerance of homosexuality.

So why is pedophilia a disorder/disease any more than homosexuality? What evidence is there that pedophilia is not only listed as a disorder/disease because it's easier to dismiss pedophiles as just people with problems? That's why homosexuality was listed as a disorder/disease; to dismiss the rights of homosexuals. Why is pedophilia different?

In addition, it's not as if psychologists are the enemy here. Consider the idea that maybe psychologists can help more pedophiles be those kind of people that we respect, the kind of pedophiles that are intelligent and mature enough to be no more likely to molest a child than anyone else.

But how are they going to do that if pedophilia is no longer a diagnosis? Just practically.

Why do you assume pedophiles need help to not molest or rape a child. As a heterosexual male with no controversial sexual interests I've never needed psychiatric help to prevent myself from molesting or raping women; why is a pedophile different? I'm sure there are pedophiles that would benefit from that sort of counseling and treatment, but there are non-pedophiles that would benefit the same. That doesn't seem like a reason to label all cases of pedophilia as a disorder or a disease.

 

[CSolarstorm]

Why do you assume pedophiles need help to not molest or rape a child. As a heterosexual male with no controversial sexual interests I've never needed psychiatric help to prevent myself from molesting or raping women; why is a pedophile different? I'm sure there are pedophiles that would benefit from that sort of counseling and treatment, but there are non-pedophiles that would benefit the same. That doesn't seem like a reason to label all cases of pedophilia as a disorder or a disease.

It's not some inherent vice that's a part of pedophilia. But what you're doing is comparing pedophiles who don't have sex to heterosexuals who do. How do you leave sex out of one side of a comparison of two sexualities? If we compare pedophilia to heterosexuality, then either they're both sexually active in their own way, or neither of them are sexually active in their own way.

Heterosexuals do not need to rape someone to have sex; they can find a valid, equal partner. However pedophiles have no moral, legal opportunity to have their preferred sex. They face a complete lack of acceptable outlets for their sexuality. It's not because they're pedophiles (not always; there are instances of pedophilia where it is) but because of the kind of situation they face.

Essentially you're asking; why should we assume that an entire demographic of people need help being celibate?

Well, imagine you were asking the same thing about heterosexuals! Imagine that now men and women cannot have sex with each other or they hurt and traumatize one another. A lot of them will probably be able to live without sex because among them are psychologically integrated and mature individuals. But all heterosexuals on the planet? All heterosexuals in a country? In a city? Let's face it, not every one of them is going to be strong enough to never have sex.

But if they had help from psychologists, some of the people who are not strong enough, might find the strategies that help them to be strong enough, and it might increase the number of people that can resist hurting others.

Does that make sense?

 

[Sadib]

marioguy has to get his sex-ed somewhere.

Only by chance did I come back to this thread and read your post. I wish there was a way to tag people to inform them when people mention them. In Texas we didn't have a sex-ed class.

 

[Manafi's Dream]

Only by chance did I come back to this thread and read your post. I wish there was a way to tag people to inform them when people mention them. In Texas we didn't have a sex-ed class.

That's how it works in the Bible Belt. I didn't even know there was sex ed until I went to public school in 9th grade! Private school is primitive in this aspect (among others, but are you really surprised).

I still stick to my original argument that the whole association of pedophilia and homosexuality is just an attempt by conservative media sources to derail any chances of success for the LGBT groups.

 

[Ausgirl]

Not really. I was saying it was a sexual fetish which its defining characteristic is the involvement of pre-pubescent children. That is all that is needed to define it, so using our values of healthy relationships such as homosexual and heterosexual ones shouldn't be grouped together. Please don't twist my words and misrepresent me.



I really don't see why you guys are so intent on shoving in normal, healthy relationships with that of a mental disorder. It seems ridiculous and unnecessary.

A sexual fetish is an act which takes place during sex, such as foot fetishism and BDSM, and therefore isn't about who is performing the act.

What is it that makes pedophilia a mental disorder? I'm genuinely curious. I've heard pedophilia described as a mental disorder before but never in a way that makes it seems like anything other than a way to demonize pedophilia. Why is it a mental disorder more than any other uncommon sexuality?

Pedophilia is a mental disorder because it causes harm to the child and also because pedophiles can learn to control their sexual behaviour through therapy.

 

[SBaby]

Here's the thing. Frankly, it isn't of any consequence to me whether you consider pedophilia a disease/disorder or not. I don't research it, and frankly I don't care. I have my own opinions on the people that do that kind of research.

The fact is, the well being of children has to be the top proprity, and no amount of rationalization of the actions of sexual predators is going to change this. This is why we have a list of registered sex offenders, so we can put them in places where they won't have regular contact with children. Can they get help? Probably, some of them. Not all of them though. Some of them are beyond help, as evidenced by how many repeat offenders there are. Just remember that each time they are considered 'rehabilitated' by authorities, those authorities are gambling with loaded dice.

 

[Iceberg]

It's not impossible pedophilia will some day be accepted. I think it's unfair to say as a blanket statement anyone under the arbitrarily determined age of consent is incapable of giving fully reasoned consent. I understand that it's safer to set the age of consent too high rather than too low, but I think as we gain greater understanding about consent and who understands what, popular opinion will shift in favor of a lower age of consent. You can say that it will never happen as much as you want, but in the 70s you would have said that about homosexuality and in the 50s about interracial marriage. I know pedophilia is much different from homosexuality and interracial relationships and you can't understand what would ever make society accept pedophilia, but in the age of scientific racism and homosexuality being labeled a mental disorder people couldn't have understood how interracial relationships and homosexuality would ever be accepted. I have no doubt that pedophilia will, within my lifetime, go the way of interracial relationships towards greater acceptance by younger and more liberal populations.

Let us not forget that the legal age of consent and pedophilic relationships involve two different age groups. If a teenager who cannot legally give consent has a relationship with an older person it is statutory rape, not pedophilia. If a 6 year old who cannot legally give consent (and shouldn't because they can barely do basic math, let alone fully gauge a situation) is in a relationship with an older person it is pedophilia.

 

[Steelers_Fan]

If my facts are still correct, the most fertile years for a female are between the first period (12-14) and like 25. In the primal and survival state, sex is merely reproduction. Pedophilia is a psychological response to a practice we had when out life expectancy was maybe mid-thirties. You had to be married by 12 and have as many children as possible because you weren't guaranteed to live the rest of the year.

This is also why we look in the past and families had 5-12 children, not only did 75% die before age five, but they needed the numbers to keep the species alive. Now that we live into our seventies and eighties, or longer, we only have one or two children.

It's a simple explanation, not a simple solution. If we foresee a population crisis, as in we almost go extinct, then pedophilia will lose it's taboo. But, I don't see that happening for a very long time

 

[Darkazure]

But another factor is that some countries and even religions actually allow this to happen. But no matter people will try to make this seem normal. Take the ancieant romans for example they were known for their great empire not only for their accomplishments but also due to their open sextually with men, women and young teens. If you look through history you will see other try to defend this as right. I don't believe in pedophillia personally.

Now think about this. Humans are the most advance or civilized forms of animal life on earth. Now stop. I said animal. Even though we have distant our selves from our monkey ancestors we re still animals no matter how much people try to deny this fact. We still have our inner animal instincts that we see as taboo or acceptable(depending on who you ask). What I'm getting at is pedophillia might be on a deeper level then just being attreacted to whatever we are attracted to. When we see a young woman(of consent) we immeadealy find her attractive but if someone else sees a young girl(not of consent) they may find them attractive due to the fact we instinctivly want to mate with younger more fertill women for better stronger offspring.

 

[Ausgirl]

Here's the thing. Frankly, it isn't of any consequence to me whether you consider pedophilia a disease/disorder or not. I don't research it, and frankly I don't care. I have my own opinions on the people that do that kind of research.

The fact is, the well being of children has to be the top proprity, and no amount of rationalization of the actions of sexual predators is going to change this. This is why we have a list of registered sex offenders, so we can put them in places where they won't have regular contact with children. Can they get help? Probably, some of them. Not all of them though. Some of them are beyond help, as evidenced by how many repeat offenders there are. Just remember that each time they are considered 'rehabilitated' by authorities, those authorities are gambling with loaded dice.

Yeah but unfortunately the system is a disgrace because many pedophiles still work in places where there are a lot of children. Basically it's just there so that if they reoffend then they are easier to prosecute.

If my facts are still correct, the most fertile years for a female are between the first period (12-14) and like 25. In the primal and survival state, sex is merely reproduction. Pedophilia is a psychological response to a practice we had when out life expectancy was maybe mid-thirties. You had to be married by 12 and have as many children as possible because you weren't guaranteed to live the rest of the year.

This is also why we look in the past and families had 5-12 children, not only did 75% die before age five, but they needed the numbers to keep the species alive. Now that we live into our seventies and eighties, or longer, we only have one or two children.

It's a simple explanation, not a simple solution. If we foresee a population crisis, as in we almost go extinct, then pedophilia will lose it's taboo. But, I don't see that happening for a very long time

Women first get their period which usually happens within 12-14 years of age although sometimes it can happen a lot later like around 16 years of age. As mentioned above, women are most fertile during their teens up to their thirties. Women can still have babies well past 40 although it's a lot harder to fall pregnant around this age and it's not reccommended because the children may experience severe learning disabilities because of it such as Autism.

However while there are many instances throughout history which involve an older man marrying an younger women, it wasn't considered to be pedophilia because back then parents controlled who their children married and it was considered normal. People were considered to be adults at a much younger age and consent of the children wasn't neccessary.

But another factor is that some countries and even religions actually allow this to happen. But no matter people will try to make this seem normal. Take the ancieant romans for example they were known for their great empire not only for their accomplishments but also due to their open sextually with men, women and young teens. If you look through history you will see other try to defend this as right. I don't believe in pedophillia personally.

Now think about this. Humans are the most advance or civilized forms of animal life on earth. Now stop. I said animal. Even though we have distant our selves from our monkey ancestors we re still animals no matter how much people try to deny this fact. We still have our inner animal instincts that we see as taboo or acceptable(depending on who you ask). What I'm getting at is pedophillia might be on a deeper level then just being attreacted to whatever we are attracted to. When we see a young woman(of consent) we immeadealy find her attractive but if someone else sees a young girl(not of consent) they may find them attractive due to the fact we instinctivly want to mate with younger more fertill women for better stronger offspring.

Yes but these are mostly poor countries with a high death rate, like India. Child marriage is needed to ensure survival. A lot of families simply can't afford basic things like food, so while boys can work and help support their families girls earn less and are seen as a liability to their family. Therefore boys can marry a lot later in life while girls are married at young ages.

 

[Iceberg]

If my facts are still correct, the most fertile years for a female are between the first period (12-14) and like 25. In the primal and survival state, sex is merely reproduction. Pedophilia is a psychological response to a practice we had when out life expectancy was maybe mid-thirties. You had to be married by 12 and have as many children as possible because you weren't guaranteed to live the rest of the year.

This is also why we look in the past and families had 5-12 children, not only did 75% die before age five, but they needed the numbers to keep the species alive. Now that we live into our seventies and eighties, or longer, we only have one or two children.

It's a simple explanation, not a simple solution. If we foresee a population crisis, as in we almost go extinct, then pedophilia will lose it's taboo. But, I don't see that happening for a very long time

As Psychic posted, engaging in sex with a 14 year old isn't pedophilia. Pedophilia is the attraction to a pre-pubescent person. After puberty but before the legal age of consent it is statutory rape - different from pedophilia.

 

[Sadib]

As Psychic posted, engaging in sex with a 14 year old isn't pedophilia. Pedophilia is the attraction to a pre-pubescent person. After puberty but before the legal age of consent it is statutory rape - different from pedophilia.

The only noticeable difference between a girl before and after puberty is change in breast size. I don't understand why one person would be attracted to a 14 year old girl, but not a 10 year old girl.

 

[Manafi's Dream]

The only noticeable difference between a girl before and after puberty is change in breast size. I don't understand why one person would be attracted to a 14 year old girl, but not a 10 year old girl.

Pubescent children are also practically bathing in hormones, many of which are in the air around them, no doubt. Pre-pubescents don't give off pheromones that suggest sexual interest, so it's like eating a cookie before it's cooked: not safe.

 

[Sadib]

Pubescent children are also practically bathing in hormones, many of which are in the air around them, no doubt. Pre-pubescents don't give off pheromones that suggest sexual interest, so it's like eating a cookie before it's cooked: not safe.

That's like saying people can't find a picture of someone attractive. I like your not cooked cookie analogy though. Cookie dough sure is delicious.

 

[Eterna]

That's how it works in the Bible Belt. I didn't even know there was sex ed until I went to public school in 9th grade! Private school is primitive in this aspect (among others, but are you really surprised).

I still stick to my original argument that the whole association of pedophilia and homosexuality is just an attempt by conservative media sources to derail any chances of success for the LGBT groups.

That's because it is. It's religious people using a weapon they used for thousands of years to control the masses: Fear.

 

[CSolarstorm]

That's like saying people can't find a picture of someone attractive. I like your not cooked cookie analogy though. Cookie dough sure is delicious.

Technically you got your answer as to why a person can be attracted to a 14 year old and not a 10 year old: pheramones. After that you switched your question to asking why a person can't be attracted to a 10 year old in addition to a 14 year old. Obviously they can, because pedophilia exists. You're moving the goalposts.

The difference between being attracted to a child's appearance and being attracted to a teenager's pheramones is that their body is already playing a part of the sexual process by giving off pheramones, while the person that is attracted could find anything attractive, and neither the child nor the child's body is involved in the process.

Manafi's Dream's metaphor was unfortunate. Their point was that there are certain foods that are inedible before they are prepared - just like a person is not ready for sex until after puberty. A better food comparison would be that you don't eat raw chicken.

If my facts are still correct, the most fertile years for a female are between the first period (12-14) and like 25. In the primal and survival state, sex is merely reproduction. Pedophilia is a psychological response to a practice we had when out life expectancy was maybe mid-thirties. You had to be married by 12 and have as many children as possible because you weren't guaranteed to live the rest of the year.

This is also why we look in the past and families had 5-12 children, not only did 75% die before age five, but they needed the numbers to keep the species alive. Now that we live into our seventies and eighties, or longer, we only have one or two children.

It's a simple explanation, not a simple solution. If we foresee a population crisis, as in we almost go extinct, then pedophilia will lose it's taboo. But, I don't see that happening for a very long time

I'm sure if breeding was a necessity to increase population, the legal age of consent would drop and we'd allow more adult-teenage relationships. It makes no sense to say that there would be more pedophilia, because pedophilia only applies to pre-pubescent children, who cannot procreate. You're completely off subject.

It's important to remember, however, that we don't determine our taboos and standards based on the lowest denominator of what is possible, we determine them based on what is most ideal, what is most healthy and beneficial, what is most comfortable. What is natural isn't even a question here - the question is what is right. Although young teenagers can procreate early, we urge them to wait a couple of years to mature beyond puberty, complete their education, and get experience in managing the advanced emotions and critical thinking that comes with post-pubertal maturity so they're more world-savvy before parenthood, more likely to be around for their kids and ready to run a complex world.

Frankly, it isn't of any consequence to me whether you consider pedophilia a disease/disorder or not. I don't research it, and frankly I don't care. I have my own opinions on the people that do that kind of research.

You're not going to do the research and you don't care. Finally some honesty!

Some people like any research just because they like researching. Pedophilia isn't exactly a particularly enjoyable branch of research, but I have a higher opinion of people who go into a conversation knowing what they are talking about.