Is Paedophilia Just Another Sexual Preference?

Just to clarify my interest in the subject, should anyone have any doubt.

When I referred to questions I would like to ask Des082 about himself my area of interest lies entirely with environmental and social development and familial relationships.

As Des082 clearly states he was in no way or form sexually abused himself.

I am not interested in discussing any aspect of his sexual development. I do not wish to discuss his fantasy, either privately on U2U or in post.

However I realise that this is a sensitive issue and I apologise for any confusion my post may have created that such discussions may arise.

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
While I firmly believe that this is a relevant topic for Social Issues, there have been problems in the past regarding these discussions, such that the T&C was amended to include a prohibition of discussions of sex with minors:

2e.) Illegal Activity: Discussion of any illegal activities such as drug use, drug paraphernalia, hacking, sexual relations with minors, etc. are strictly forbidden.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I'll be very disappointed in a mod closes this thread for a violation of T&C. I started this thread about 6 months ago and it has now run to 6 pages. A bit late to close it if you ask me!

In my opinion the T&C should be changed. When PTS has forums specifically for discussion of social issues surely free discussion of all topics should be allowed, including that of illegal activities.

Originally posted by gfad
I honestly believe that paedophilia just like homosexuality isnt something imparted upon you but something you are born with and cant change.

Don't know if this has been addressed yet (haven't read the whole thread), so here goes.

First off, I'm not a paedophile, but I have known some. (done a bit of councilling)

In my personal opinion paedophilia isn't an inborn trait. One guy I talked to was attracted to pubescent girls because his first sexual experiences were with girls of around eleven and twelve, when he was fourteen. I know a lot of guys have done this and grown out of it, but he hadn't. Even as a Christian he had the 'tendency', though he didn't act on it. He didn't get into the children's ministry of course!

Another guy just liked girls with small boobs, whether they be twelve or twenty.

Anyway, just my contribution.

Originally posted by jimboman
In my personal opinion paedophilia isn't an inborn trait. One guy I talked to was attracted to pubescent girls because his first sexual experiences were with girls of around eleven and twelve, when he was fourteen. I know a lot of guys have done this and grown out of it, but he hadn't. Even as a Christian he had the 'tendency', though he didn't act on it. He didn't get into the children's ministry of course!

Another guy just liked girls with small boobs, whether they be twelve or twenty.

I can see what you are saying but you havn't posted anything which shows that paedophilia isnt inborn.

Maybe "patient 1" was born with a paedophilic trait but only realised it with his first sexual experiences. Most paedophiles probably had their first sexual experiences with a young person, that doesnt mean that that was when they became attracted to young people, it mught jsut be when they realised this attraction.

Good points gfad. I didn't consider that. It could be the same as a homosexual only realising he (or she) is when they have a sexual experience with a member of the same sex.

edited cause it was a one-liner.

[edit on 13/3/07 by jimboman]

Originally posted by gfad
In my opinion the T&C should be changed. When PTS has forums specifically for discussion of social issues surely free discussion of all topics should be allowed, including that of illegal activities.

You know, I think the T&C were actually changed to include that after
this thread was started, not as a result or anything, but this thread
predates the change if I'm not mistaken.

I would'nt worry, this thread has in no way violated the T&C that I
have seen.

It is another sexual preference, but it's not just another sexual preference.
Regardless of whether one is born that way or not, is not a justification for its acceptability. Serial Killers, Arsonists, Rapists, Drug Dealers, etc.. were all born that way too. It's a defect in the way their brains work, but not an excuse for them to behave that way.

Originally posted by BlueRaja
Serial Killers, Arsonists, Rapists, Drug Dealers, etc.. were all born that way too. It's a defect in the way their brains work, but not an excuse for them to behave that way.

No one who does those things was born that way.

A person can be a serial killer, and simply do it because they believe
there religion justifies it, or because they get payed alot of money for
the killings.

Arsonists may do it for the same reasons as the above, or because
they just like fire.

Rape is purely a control thing.

Drug dealers do it for many reasons.


My point is, no one is born with murderersyndrome or some such.


Also, those things are all negative, having sexual relations with
someone who is consenting is not, in my opinion a crime in any way.

I agree with you in that there is no excuse for active paedophilia. Excluding some organic brain injuries or defects we are all capable of making the choice between good and bad behaviour and Des082 is an excellent example of this.

However, I do not believe that arsonists, serial killers and other violent offenders, including active paedophiles are born that way. Biological predisposition may be a factor but environmental and social development will influence more keenly whether that person becomes an offender.

Most serial killers for example demonstrate an inability to relate to other living beings, thiscan have its root cause in the failure to bond with a 'mother' and generally occurs within the first few weeks of infancy. A lack of empathy combined with a violent or sexually abusive upbringing may lead to a need for control. The age of pubescences is generally when these defects of personality manifest themselves and the fantasy cycle begins.

The majority of those with paedophiliac tendencies never act them out. Now how many of these had ever suffered abuse themselves or had a in-born predisposition I don't know and I don't think that the question can ever be answered unless there is open-ness towards this particular problem.

A paedophile is reviled whether they act out or not. The fact that the child-sex killer is the rarest of all killers offers very little comfort to most. That there may be thousands of people out their struggling to control this problem troubles me. They can't be helped if they are in hiding. They can only therefore be helped once they have acted out, at which point society washes it's hands of them.

Homosexuality and paedophilia for me cannot be compared. One is between two consenting adults (or individuals of the same age) the other requires the exploitation of someone who is neither physically or mentally mature.

Sociologically and anthropologically there is some evidence for both. For example in some polynesian cultures, men without a sexual interest in women and in traditional male pursuits would be part of the extended family assisting in child care. It would be a matter of the norms and values of those communities whether sexual activity between these males occurred. Similarly some cultures have what could be described as paedophilia where the 'seed' is passed from warrior to the boy initiate, this is a ritual act and not for sexual gratification per se.

I think there are a whole spectrum of sexual orientations, not just those commonly defined.

For it to be natural, paedohilia must be considered as a love for children, someone who loves children knows that sex with children is abhorrent and harmful, therefore people who have sexual inclinations to children are not natural and have a problem that may or may not be treatable.

I will chime in on this one:
I do believe that there is a point where the younge, as curious as they are, need to be protected, even from their own actions and as a society, we should be there to protect them. It is natural for a child to be curious to know what their parents are doing at night. I do believe that it is also within human nature to desire that which they can not have or touch, hence the number of paedophils that are arrested. I know from my own point of view, I have watched alot of the Dateline series on the tv, "To Catch a Predator" and the number of people they catch is astounding. And it keeps growing, showing that this is not just an isolated thing, but covers all across the spectrum of the population, generational and social gaps. I think that the age of consent is differnt for all children, but should be around 16 to 17. Because that is the average age when children, part way to be being an adult by the legal definition are curious about sex.
I do believe it is wrong to touch some one that younge, but that is my own beliefe.
I however do not believe that such is an illness, rather it is like a narcotic, something that is the center of an obsession/focus for those who would engage in such. It could be construed as similar to that of homosexuality as it was defined back in the 50's as being a mental illness. I think it is something else, what I am not sure, but definately not an illness.
To those who would do harm to another, such as the parent who stated that if his daughter stated that her neighbor did something illegale, as much as I can see your point of view, and trust me in your shoes I would go after the person, the thing to remember is this: YOu need to act calmly and in a rational manor, especially if you yourself do not want to get into trouble. And where would you suggest one who was convicted of that crime live? And how would you go about protecting not just your child, but society as a whole?

Originally posted by sdcigarpig
I however do not believe that such is an illness, rather it is like a narcotic, something that is the center of an obsession/focus for those who would engage in such. It could be construed as similar to that of homosexuality as it was defined back in the 50's as being a mental illness. I think it is something else, what I am not sure, but definately not an illness.

I think you make an excellent point that it can be compared to a narcotic, especially in its cyclical effect; the come down, the need for more and more exposure to the addiction source etc.

As far as classification is concerned I find it hard to reach a conclusion. As I pointed out in my previous post, I do think it could be an 'abnormal' development of natural feelings of love and nurture towards children. It is human nature to want to protect the young of society. I therefore cannot help but think that with paedophiles something has 'gone wrong' developmentally, possibly during psycho-sexual development. Some Paedophiles are essentially harmless and never act out, but combined with a character disorder such as sadism or sociopathy then the likelihood of acting out increases.

There seems to me as many causes of paedophiliac behaviour as there are manifestations. Which is why I do think it is a distortion of normal instinctive behaviour. However other elements such as the need to control and exploit someone weaker that you, inability to relate to adults, arrested mental development, as well as incidences of abuse in their own childhood can all be factors. It depends as always on the individuals.

Originally posted by sdcigarpig
And where would you suggest one who was convicted of that crime live? And how would you go about protecting not just your child, but society as a whole?

Exactly!

This is where the classification of paedophilia as an illness or mental disorder would potentially help. It could, theoretically, be rationalised as beyond the persons control and they could with some impunity seek treatment before they reach a point of needing to act out. Identification and villification only serves to drive people closer to the edge and into hiding. This is self-defeatist on many levels.

reply to post by gfad

You may be correct in saying that this is simply a sexual preferece. However I personally disagree. Most cases like this involve more then sexual acts but also other forms of abuse. As for it not be something that can be cured I too disagree with that. While treatment is not always an effective means to the end it can be. Studies of the brains of phedophiles show signifagnt findings that tell us that if the area of the brain that makes them have the impulses can be isolated that drug treatment can be valuable and successful. Having said that, we know that homosexuals have no such areas in the brain that make their preference curable but the phedophiles do so what does that tell us? That phedophila is a psychology disease, most defiently abnormal and therefore not simply a perference.