Basically what it says on the tin. Having read though some of the materials on the issue, I am baffled by how recklessly the word is used, given the consequences of such usage.
Pedophiles are the people with sexual attraction to prepubescent children. It doesn’t matter whether they do or don’t act on that attraction; in fact, many don’t. It is a sexual interest/mental condition that cannot be reliably changed.
Child molesters, on the other hand, are not necessarily pedophiles - in fact, 50 to 75% of child molesters do not have pedophilic interest.
Both facts can be sourced from the respective Wikipedia article and more info can be found in respective research.
Why does this matter?
Because the current use of the word reinforces stigma around pedophilia and makes it less likely for people with pedophilic disorder to reach out for help for the fear they would be outed and treated the same as actual child abusers.
This, in turn, makes those in a vulnerable position more likely to cross the line and get into the category of child abusers instead of coming for help. Also, it heavily affects people who did nothing to deserve such treatment.
What should we do?
We should leave the word “pedophile” to the context in which it belongs, which is the mental health and sexuality spheres, and avoid using the term to describe sexual offenders against minors. At the very least, one would most likely be wrong. At most, one would participate in the cycle of child abuse.
You must log in or # to comment.
Good truly unpopular opinion, and mostly good discussion on the points made. That said, I think pretty much all the points that were going to be made have been made. Locking thread.
This is a prime example of what the community is about.
With that said, advocating violence (read: not justice) will not be tolerated. Vigilante mindsets will not be allowed.
Really getting tired of removing comments calling for death. Advocate for strict justice, not death itself.
Thank you for this post. I think you’ve expressed your thoughts very well.
An additional benefit to a well thought out and nuanced post like this is being able to block people who don’t think things through and wouldn’t be able to grasp nuance even if it was slathered in Gorilla Glue.
If one assumes that merely by being a pedophile someone is danger to kids then by the same logic being a heterosexual is a danger to the opposite sex.
Most people in jail for raping children are “normal” rapists with no specific interest towards kids. They’re just an easy target. Being able to rape someone requires a special kind of twisted mind. Just being sexually interested about it alone in general isn’t enough. Many people have sexual interests they’re not going to pursue for moral reasons. Pedophiles can and usually do have morals as well.
My unpopular opinion is that pedophilia is a paraphilia and not necessarily a mental condition, even though some cases do manifest that way. But maybe I’m wrong. Please, go easy with the lynching.
True!
Pedophilia by itself is not considered to be a disorder starting with DSM-V/ICD-11.
However, if pedophilic thoughts cause distress or may lead to dangerous behaviors, it is seen as a pedophilic disorder, which remains in both medical classifications.
Should have made this point clear.
When I think about how many famous, powerful people have been outed as child molesters, it definitely seems to me that pedophilia is something that can develop within people. I don’t think that pedophiles tend to become famous, nor do I think that the trend among powerful people is reflected in the general population.
From the wikipedia article
There are motives for child sexual abuse that are unrelated to pedophilia, such as stress, marital problems, the unavailability of an adult partner, general anti-social tendencies, high sex drive or alcohol use.
This seems crazy to me and I don’t think any of it explains why so many powerful people actively seek to molest children. Treating pedophilia as a condition or as a quirk in one’s sexuality seems dangerous to me. You can like petite people, you can do schoolgirl roleplay or whatever you want with a consenting adult. Don’t even think about kids. That should be an immediate red light in anyone’s brain.
Edit: nah I think OP’s cooking actually, after thinking about it. If it helps pedophiles seek help then who am I to insist on calling child molesters pedophiles?
In some peoples’ brains it’s just not. Attraction works in a way that doesn’t ask you for your stance.
And among wealthy and powerful, there are plenty of sociopaths who would abuse a child without being pedophilic per se. Also, if you check the age of their victims, this is most commonly post-puberty minors, and attraction to those is highly common in an adult population.
There is currently no evidence that pedophilia can be developed, except for the fact that there’s an elevated percentage of pedophiles among people who have survived child sexual abuse as minors themselves.
But, it is an actual mental condition/mental illness/mental disorder. Just like what op said, there are, in fact, a lot of people that are attracted to kids that know it’s wrong and don’t act on those thoughts. They can not control having those thoughts in the same way that I can see a beautiful woman and am immediately attracted to them.
If child molesters don’t have sexual interests. Why do they molest children? If they don’t have pedophilic interests why would they be more likely to cross the line? Sorry I’m just a bit confused.
Power. Not a bad question
Wow, this one got me. Top tier unpopular opinion.
You lay out pretty good points, mostly in terms of specificity.
And then you continue pointing out that there’s likely no choice for a pedophile, and that they’re not abusers until they abuse someone. And hey, I can get on board with that.
But man, if you really think that there shouldn’t be a severe social stigma attached to pedophilia, then I really gotta disagree with you there. This should be something a person should only feel comfortable talking about with their doctor, close loved ones, or anonymously like you’re doing here. There should be no stigma attached to getting help, but this isn’t fun facts about yourself you should share with others.
If this is you, get help. And if you are getting help, I am honestly glad for you. But please don’t ever think that anyone outside of professionals, loved ones, and other pedophiles is ever going to not have a visceral reaction to the revelation that you are attracted to kids. It is an appropriate defense mechanism meant to attempt to separate potential victims from their potential abusers.
I think you contradict yourself here. You say there should be a stigma about having these thoughts but then say people should get help and not be stigmatized for it.
If there is a stigmatization about it, then that is going to keep people from bringing it up and getting help due to fear of being attacked either physically, financially, or emotionally.
Certified lover-boy? Certified child molester WOP WOP WOP WOP WOP
Seems the sort of thing a Pedo would say. Rapists should be neutered, especially anyone who raped a kid…
I don’t believe in calling them map or whatever stupid term we are using to enable them.
Full disclosure: not a pedo, but know one.
The entire point of my argument is that pedophile doesn’t have to abuse children; many don’t, and we have to support them to make sure isolation and stigma don’t lead to dangerous behavior.
There is therapy available for such people to not ever be dangers to kids, and that’s the correct way to direct them.
I feel like you didn’t even read what was said.
For many, pedophiles, or whatever other minor-philes are akin to Nazis or something else universally reviled.
There’s no perceptive redemption or discussion.
For many, including me, that’s fine.
Consent is mandatory, anything outside it is a done discussion. I understand the discussion on precrime, as related to non offending attraction, but for many the mere thoughts earn the end of tolerance.
As such, policing language to be tolerant of that group is a non starter.
Edit Do note I never called for lynchings or purges or minority report arrests. The law should cover all equally.
Nope. Pedophiles are child molesters. Something you want to tell us?
Child molesters are child molesters.
So are pedophiles, and hebephiles.
Except when they aren’t. What don’t you understand about this?
Obviously the core concept.
Pedophiles are bad people. Regardless of if they have ‘offended’ or not. I’m okay with chemically, or physically castrating them to help remove those urges, or putting them to death. I don’t care about their feelings or if they’re mixed up with child molesters.
This is a very basic view of the world.
Pedophiles are people who randomly happen to have an interest in children. They can’t do much about it; they can remove the sexual element (but not romantic one) by chemical castration, but most of them also experience attraction to adults, which will also get cut off.
In any case, this will feed into frustration, which may have other negative consequences.
Killing all pedophiles is not only inhumane, but also unfeasible, since you cannot separate them from others. And this won’t remove the trait of pedophilia from the population; for all we know, the nature of pedophilia is not purely genetic.
It’s also a self-defeating strategy. If it means paedophiles can’t come forward to their therapist for fear of facing severe consequences, they…won’t come forward. And won’t get treatment to help them deal without causing harm. And will thus end up more likely to cause harm.
Attraction is not a choice. If you believe it is, tell me when you chose to be attracted to whatever floats your boat.
What I’m attracted to includes consent.
Being attracted to something that can’t consent is not alike other attractions.
Edit downvotes from people who think consent is optional.
The attraction is not defined by the consent of the other party. You would be attracted to the same people even if dating them would hurt them. You’re just lucky not to, it never was a moral choice.
Now what is a moral choice is what you do with such attraction. And celibacy in relation to such potentially damaging attraction is the only moral option.
The point is that variety of attraction is not ok. It is not like any other attractions
Edit it should not be normalized or accepted. It should be treated as a critical issue.
It should be treated like “you’re not bad for having that, but you’ll absolutely be bad if you act on it”.
We should always highlight that attraction itself is natural and just happens, but what differentiates between it and other attractions is that you really really shouldn’t pursue anything based on it.
It should not be normalized like any other attraction. It should be treated as a critical illness
Edit seriously y’all are way to casual with this shit.
Edit edit
Being a pedo is not like being straight or gay or liking a particular hair style or something. It’s a sickness no matter what semantic circles people want to run.
I love how you entirely agree with everything OP wrote, but still want to argue anyway.
no-one is being casual.
no-one is talking about normalising anything.
it’s always been said to be a sickness, which was the entire point of the post. it’s a sickness.
sicknesses are not their fault. sicknesses should be treated. This is a discussion about a way to help deal with the sickness that also reduces children getting abused at the same time.
Right, which is why we seek non-punitive ways to help correct that attraction.
A thing doesn’t not have to be universally equal to be similar to another.
Don’t disagree with finding ways to help people. In this or my other comment I never said pedos aren’t deserving of medical treatment
Edit but my point was that not all attractions are valid. Only consent based attractions are valid.
Because the current use of the word reinforces stigma around pedophilia and makes it less likely for people with pedophilic disorder to reach out for help for the fear they would be outed and treated the same as actual child abusers.
This is a semantic argument. Words change all the time; it’s OK. It’s especially common for clinical words to move into the pubic domain where they loose their clinical usefulness and even become pejorative. We just need a new word to describe the thing you’re talking about.
There is no power in the spoken syllables or the written configuration of the word pedophile. Any other word will do just as well. Trying to prevent language shift is wrestling the tide.
There is an umbrella term for all people attracted to all ages of minors: minor-attracted person (MAP). This term was often used not only as a more clinically correct one, but also as a less stigmatized word.
As a result, this word got stigmatized too, because the underlying issue has not been solved.
