Pedophilia Deserves Civil Rights, Says New York Times’ Op-ed

[koshergrl]

"In DSM-3, for example, the “APA said that one who acted upon one’s sexual attraction to children was a pedophile,” noted Liberty Counsel. But by the fourth edition of the DSM, the APA had “changed the criteria,” continued the pro-family group, “saying that pedophilia was only a disorder if it 'caused clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational or other important areas of functioning.'” Then came the notorious Rind study on child sexual abuse, which “concluded that man-boy 'consensual' relationships were not necessarily harmful....Following the public outcry of the Rind study, APA said moral values trumped the scientific study.”

Psychiatric Group Backtracks on Pedophilia Classification

 

[BullKurtz]

Little wonder the NYT is in it's death dance....anything to stir the pot. Who would want to advertise in such a filthy, traitorous rag? In the worst of the Iraq war, they were publishing top-secret documents. I always wondered why Dubya didn't send in an FBI team to grab their computers and duck walk them out to waiting paddy wagons.

 

[Silhouette]

Just how FUCKED UP MENTALLY, can Liberals get...read about it in the N.Y. SLIMES!!!

Daily Caller ^

The nation’s tough anti-pedophilia laws are unfair to pedophiles, according to an op-ed published by The New York Times’ editors. “One can live with pedophilia and not act on it,” says Margo Kaplan, an entrepreneurial assistant law professor at Rutgers University, and a former lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union. Tragically, the roughly 1 percent of “people who are sexually attracted to children] must hide their disorder from everyone they know — or risk losing educational and job opportunities, and face the prospect of harassment and even violence,” she wrote.....

"Disorder"? I thought sexual orientation was "beautiful, natural and OK"?

 

[flacaltenn]

To DIAGNOSE a pedophile without some evidence of child abuse is like trying to DIAGNOSE an alcoholic who's never had a weekly bender.. No patient history -- no disease.

DIAGNOSE. Here's the scene, a patient sitting in the psychologist's office:

Patient: "Doc, all of my sexual fantasies are focused on 10 year old boys. I know it's wrong, I always avoid being alone with children, I don't want to hurt any child, but when I'm alone I think about those naked boys and me on a desert island, blah blah blah. What can I do to stop fixating on naked 10 year old boys? Help me please.​

You're telling me that this guy is not a pedophile in your books?

This guy is a pedophile but he's not a child molester. Like the op-ed writer noted, pedophilia is a diagnosis, not a crime. Child abuse is the crime.

Let's handle the Last part first. The guy MAY BE a pedophile, but he's gonna be a child molester BEFORE he gets his official pedophile diploma when this "intervention" fails.

From the quotes got that posted about what TOOLS the shrink has to use we know ---

1) TALKING the guy out this state is futile.
2) The "doc" is NOT gonna escalate to chemical castration or sedation without shitloads of further evidence.
3) This is the BEGINNING of diagnosis and is insufficient to leap to conclusions.

What is this guys age, life situation, previous mental history?
What is the story of his sexual activity?
Has he obtained child porn or catalogued potential children for his own purposes?
Has he associated with OTHERS who have the same fantasies?
What OTHER fantasies might this person have?

All leading up to the assessment of what COMMITMENTS the person has made to start ILLEGAL activities associated with child abuse.

It COULD eventually lead to a diagnosis of pedophilia, but there is no meaningful treatment until there is an ACT or specific INTENT towards child abuse. Correct me if I'm wrong here.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

To DIAGNOSE a pedophile without some evidence of child abuse is like trying to DIAGNOSE an alcoholic who's never had a weekly bender.. No patient history -- no disease.

DIAGNOSE. Here's the scene, a patient sitting in the psychologist's office:

Patient: "Doc, all of my sexual fantasies are focused on 10 year old boys. I know it's wrong, I always avoid being alone with children, I don't want to hurt any child, but when I'm alone I think about those naked boys and me on a desert island, blah blah blah. What can I do to stop fixating on naked 10 year old boys? Help me please.​

You're telling me that this guy is not a pedophile in your books?

This guy is a pedophile but he's not a child molester. Like the op-ed writer noted, pedophilia is a diagnosis, not a crime. Child abuse is the crime.

Let's handle the Last part first. The guy MAY BE a pedophile, but he's gonna be a child molester BEFORE he gets his official pedophile diploma when this "intervention" fails.

From the quotes got that posted about what TOOLS the shrink has to use we know ---

1) TALKING the guy out this state is futile.
2) The "doc" is NOT gonna escalate to chemical castration or sedation without shitloads of further evidence.
3) This is the BEGINNING of diagnosis and is insufficient to leap to conclusions.

What is this guys age, life situation, previous mental history?
What is the story of his sexual activity?
Has he obtained child porn or catalogued potential children for his own purposes?
Has he associated with OTHERS who have the same fantasies?
What OTHER fantasies might this person have?

All leading up to the assessment of what COMMITMENTS the person has made to start ILLEGAL activities associated with child abuse.

It COULD eventually lead to a diagnosis of pedophilia, but there is no meaningful treatment until there is an ACT or specific INTENT towards child abuse. Correct me if I'm wrong here.

My first thought wouldn't be pedophile due to highly specific nature of what he's attracted to. As in specificly 10 year old boys. I'd be thinking some kind of OCD before pedophilia.

Also being attracted and having fantasies isn't a problem. If we could read each other's minds what we all fantasize about would cause riots and the end of civilization. It's not what you fantasize about that's ever a problem, only what you do.

 

[Silhouette]

Let's handle the Last part first. The guy MAY BE a pedophile, but he's gonna be a child molester BEFORE he gets his official pedophile diploma when this "intervention" fails.

From the quotes got that posted about what TOOLS the shrink has to use we know ---

1) TALKING the guy out this state is futile.
2) The "doc" is NOT gonna escalate to chemical castration or sedation without shitloads of further evidence.
3) This is the BEGINNING of diagnosis and is insufficient to leap to conclusions.

What is this guys age, life situation, previous mental history?
What is the story of his sexual activity?
Has he obtained child porn or catalogued potential children for his own purposes?
Has he associated with OTHERS who have the same fantasies?
What OTHER fantasies might this person have?

All leading up to the assessment of what COMMITMENTS the person has made to start ILLEGAL activities associated with child abuse.

It COULD eventually lead to a diagnosis of pedophilia, but there is no meaningful treatment until there is an ACT or specific INTENT towards child abuse. Correct me if I'm wrong here.

The question begs..... Who are you to disparage this man's sexual orientation?

Was he not "born this way"? And if so, isn't his sexual orientation perfectly natural and OK?

And if not, I'll assume you will explain that by saying it presents a harm to children. But as you know I'd then counter with lewd gay pride parades inviting children to march and attend, and the veneration of Harvey Milk [himself a pedophile] by the LGBT community at-large.

To date have you ever heard of an LGBT person speak up to denounce either gay pride parades or the veneration of Harvey Milk?

Me neither.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Look at what horror writers and movie makers have been earning a lviing producing for decades. No one proposes we lock them up for what they think about.

 

[flacaltenn]

Let's be clear.. Even Psychology Today understands that if you want to define what leads to pedophilia --- you look for previous acts of child abuse. The author can't think straight if she thinks that "non-child abusers" need ANY KIND of protection..

Please read...

THAT my bud --- is the definition of "Pre-Pedophile"... And when Psychology Today wants to spot the signs of Child Abusers --- they know enough to POLL pedophiles for the answers..

I did read that article and it suffers from the limiation I already noted, it only studies those people who have offended. Even the title gives it away "How Can We Spot a Child Molester?"

A pedophile is to a child molester like a sober alcoholic is to a soused alcoholic. Even that doesn't work so well because a sober alcoholic was presumably a drinker at some point. Better is a virgin homosexual to a sexually active homosexual. The virgin knows that he likes looking at sweaty construction workers but never acts on it. These people exist but we have no clue about them. That's a problem. How can they control themselves without acting?

The research you quote was developed from interviews with offenders:

When researchers Reuben Lang and Roy Frenzel interviewed 52 incest and 50 pedophilic offenders, they found that the average age of child molesters is thirty-four. Updated stats indicate that 25% are over 40.
​

Again, back to the title "How Can We Spot a Child Molester?"

Pedoes also have extremely high recidivism rates, and are almost guaranteed to continue their compulsions after being released from prison after being caught. Once caught, they should kept locked up for life, either in prisons or mental asylums.

A pedophile doesn't have any recidivism rate, a child sex abuser does. As for what should be done about then, let that be part of the criminal sentence, not a mental health order cloaked in secrecy.

ALL pedos are child abusers. I don't know what kind of fictitious "immaculate" pedophile you imagine. It begins with desires, progresses to obsessions with grooming children thru lewd acts and finally ends up as rape. You are attempting to define pedophilia in it's dormant early stages. A point at which no definitive diagnosis can be made.. And using that as a definition - this NYTimes POS rant has no merit...

 

[flacaltenn]

Let's handle the Last part first. The guy MAY BE a pedophile, but he's gonna be a child molester BEFORE he gets his official pedophile diploma when this "intervention" fails.

From the quotes got that posted about what TOOLS the shrink has to use we know ---

1) TALKING the guy out this state is futile.
2) The "doc" is NOT gonna escalate to chemical castration or sedation without shitloads of further evidence.
3) This is the BEGINNING of diagnosis and is insufficient to leap to conclusions.

What is this guys age, life situation, previous mental history?
What is the story of his sexual activity?
Has he obtained child porn or catalogued potential children for his own purposes?
Has he associated with OTHERS who have the same fantasies?
What OTHER fantasies might this person have?

All leading up to the assessment of what COMMITMENTS the person has made to start ILLEGAL activities associated with child abuse.

It COULD eventually lead to a diagnosis of pedophilia, but there is no meaningful treatment until there is an ACT or specific INTENT towards child abuse. Correct me if I'm wrong here.

The question begs..... Who are you to disparage this man's sexual orientation?

Was he not "born this way"? And if so, isn't his sexual orientation perfectly natural and OK?

And if not, I'll assume you will explain that by saying it presents a harm to children. But as you know I'd then counter with lewd gay pride parades inviting children to march and attend, and the veneration of Harvey Milk [himself a pedophile] by the LGBT community at-large.

To date have you ever heard of an LGBT person speak up to denounce either gay pride parades or the veneration of Harvey Milk?

Me neither.

I don't know -- but I doubt pedos are "born that way".. It's not a defined orientation. These guys can be highly respectable family men like the Penn State coach was.

But you DO have a point about Gay Pride parades. The act of swinging your dong down Broadway in front of God and everyone may not be INTENTIONALLY exposing children to sexualization, but it is GROSSLY insensitive to the nurturing norms of society and is WELCOMED by those who are into grooming children... That ought to be recognized by the LGBT community as a HUGE liability to their credibility..

 

[Rikurzhen]

Let's handle the Last part first. The guy MAY BE a pedophile, but he's gonna be a child molester BEFORE he gets his official pedophile diploma when this "intervention" fails.

From the quotes got that posted about what TOOLS the shrink has to use we know ---

1) TALKING the guy out this state is futile.
2) The "doc" is NOT gonna escalate to chemical castration or sedation without shitloads of further evidence.
3) This is the BEGINNING of diagnosis and is insufficient to leap to conclusions.

What is this guys age, life situation, previous mental history?
What is the story of his sexual activity?
Has he obtained child porn or catalogued potential children for his own purposes?
Has he associated with OTHERS who have the same fantasies?
What OTHER fantasies might this person have?

All leading up to the assessment of what COMMITMENTS the person has made to start ILLEGAL activities associated with child abuse.

It COULD eventually lead to a diagnosis of pedophilia, but there is no meaningful treatment until there is an ACT or specific INTENT towards child abuse. Correct me if I'm wrong here.

The question begs..... Who are you to disparage this man's sexual orientation?

Was he not "born this way"? And if so, isn't his sexual orientation perfectly natural and OK?

And if not, I'll assume you will explain that by saying it presents a harm to children. But as you know I'd then counter with lewd gay pride parades inviting children to march and attend, and the veneration of Harvey Milk [himself a pedophile] by the LGBT community at-large.

To date have you ever heard of an LGBT person speak up to denounce either gay pride parades or the veneration of Harvey Milk?

Me neither.

I don't know -- but I doubt pedos are "born that way".. It's not a defined orientation. These guys can be highly respectable family men like the Penn State coach was.

From the op-ed:

Part of this failure stems from the misconception that pedophilia is the same as child molestation. One can live with pedophilia and not act on it. Sites like Virtuous Pedophiles provide support for pedophiles who do not molest children and believe that sex with children is wrong. It is not that these individuals are “inactive” or “nonpracticing” pedophiles, but rather that pedophilia is a status and not an act. In fact, research shows, about half of all child molesters are not sexually attracted to their victims.

A second misconception is that pedophilia is a choice. Recent research, while often limited to sex offenders — because of the stigma of pedophilia — suggests that the disorder may have neurological origins.
​

I've seen brain scans of homosexuals and transsexuals and there's no doubt at all that their brains are wired differently. I haven't seen brain scans of pedophiles but I wouldn't be surprised that they too are born that way.

Brain development in a fetus is a pretty complicated recipe and as we see with both homosexuals and transsexuals, development disorders do occur.

As for your reference to Sandusky, yes you're right, which signals that some pedophiles don't focus exclusively on children. If these guys can be target early perhaps they can be trained to direct their impulses towards having sex with a grown woman. Have an impulse, get your wife to dress like a little girl, or boy, and get giggidy. I don't know, but I'd much rather be trying to reduce crimes against children than to let these people fester in isolation until they finally lash out.

 

[Picaro]

This is not a treatable condition, it is a bomb waiting to go off period. I'm sure the mental health profession will gladly take money from anyone to "help". The only medical cure might be castration. How many liberals are willing to try that?

I think they've had many cases where even medical castration doesn't work, at least on many subjects.

 

[koshergrl]

To DIAGNOSE a pedophile without some evidence of child abuse is like trying to DIAGNOSE an alcoholic who's never had a weekly bender.. No patient history -- no disease.

DIAGNOSE. Here's the scene, a patient sitting in the psychologist's office:

Patient: "Doc, all of my sexual fantasies are focused on 10 year old boys. I know it's wrong, I always avoid being alone with children, I don't want to hurt any child, but when I'm alone I think about those naked boys and me on a desert island, blah blah blah. What can I do to stop fixating on naked 10 year old boys? Help me please.​

You're telling me that this guy is not a pedophile in your books?

This guy is a pedophile but he's not a child molester. Like the op-ed writer noted, pedophilia is a diagnosis, not a crime. Child abuse is the crime.

Let's handle the Last part first. The guy MAY BE a pedophile, but he's gonna be a child molester BEFORE he gets his official pedophile diploma when this "intervention" fails.

From the quotes got that posted about what TOOLS the shrink has to use we know ---

1) TALKING the guy out this state is futile.
2) The "doc" is NOT gonna escalate to chemical castration or sedation without shitloads of further evidence.
3) This is the BEGINNING of diagnosis and is insufficient to leap to conclusions.

What is this guys age, life situation, previous mental history?
What is the story of his sexual activity?
Has he obtained child porn or catalogued potential children for his own purposes?
Has he associated with OTHERS who have the same fantasies?
What OTHER fantasies might this person have?

All leading up to the assessment of what COMMITMENTS the person has made to start ILLEGAL activities associated with child abuse.

It COULD eventually lead to a diagnosis of pedophilia, but there is no meaningful treatment until there is an ACT or specific INTENT towards child abuse. Correct me if I'm wrong here.

My first thought wouldn't be pedophile due to highly specific nature of what he's attracted to. As in specificly 10 year old boys. I'd be thinking some kind of OCD before pedophilia.

Also being attracted and having fantasies isn't a problem. If we could read each other's minds what we all fantasize about would cause riots and the end of civilization. It's not what you fantasize about that's ever a problem, only what you do.

That's exactly what all the "pedophilia is a sexual orientation, let's not make them uncomfortable!" people claim!

 

[Slyhunter]

You know what's "fair" for pedophiles? A noose!

You can't blame a person who is attracted to children any more than you can blame a person for being attracted to the same sex. In either case it isn't their fault they were born that way.

You can only blame them for the actions they actually take.

What harm does an adult male do to anyone who masterbates to pictures of children but does not actually pursue, sexually, any child?

 

[Slyhunter]

Just how FUCKED UP MENTALLY, can Liberals get...read about it in the N.Y. SLIMES!!!

Daily Caller ^

The nation’s tough anti-pedophilia laws are unfair to pedophiles, according to an op-ed published by The New York Times’ editors. “One can live with pedophilia and not act on it,” says Margo Kaplan, an entrepreneurial assistant law professor at Rutgers University, and a former lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union. Tragically, the roughly 1 percent of “people who are sexually attracted to children] must hide their disorder from everyone they know — or risk losing educational and job opportunities, and face the prospect of harassment and even violence,” she wrote.....

I dont care if its unfair. Tough shit. You hurt children and you lose any sympathy I have for you as a human.

If "you hurt children". What about the pedophiles who don't hurt children? Like an alcoholic who doesn't drink alcohol?

 

[Picaro]

In point of fact, everything the APA ever decides is political and teh result of popular voting. The science that elads to how people vote is scientific, but the decisions to recategorize things is democratic thus political.

There was no such science then,. and there isn't any now. Ad hoc explanations are not 'science', but just creative writing exercises. PC mau-mauing doesn't encourage 'science'.

 

[JWBooth]

Just how FUCKED UP MENTALLY, can Liberals get...read about it in the N.Y. SLIMES!!!

Daily Caller ^

The nation’s tough anti-pedophilia laws are unfair to pedophiles, according to an op-ed published by The New York Times’ editors. “One can live with pedophilia and not act on it,” says Margo Kaplan, an entrepreneurial assistant law professor at Rutgers University, and a former lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union. Tragically, the roughly 1 percent of “people who are sexually attracted to children] must hide their disorder from everyone they know — or risk losing educational and job opportunities, and face the prospect of harassment and even violence,” she wrote.....

It is the Times, would you really expect anything different from them?

 

[Slyhunter]

Explain how you can treat a pedophile, but not a homosexual.

Pedophilia, according to the author, is a recognized mental illness. Homosexuality is not.

Pretty simple.

"recognized"
That's a rule based on opinion.
What if they refused to recognize alcoholism as a psychological disease, does that make it not a disease? What is, is regardless as to who recognizes it to be.

 

[Slyhunter]

First, if they have not acted on their pedophilic urges, they should have nothing to fear from the law. If they do act on their perverse desires, they should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Secondly, as I understand the situation, if they seek mental health treatment to overcome their urges, and when they are caught indulging themselves, they are still treated as having mental health issues. Harming children, especially in this particularly heinous and sick manner, is unacceptable.

Harming children or pictures of children?

 

[Asclepias]

Just how FUCKED UP MENTALLY, can Liberals get...read about it in the N.Y. SLIMES!!!

Daily Caller ^

The nation’s tough anti-pedophilia laws are unfair to pedophiles, according to an op-ed published by The New York Times’ editors. “One can live with pedophilia and not act on it,” says Margo Kaplan, an entrepreneurial assistant law professor at Rutgers University, and a former lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union. Tragically, the roughly 1 percent of “people who are sexually attracted to children] must hide their disorder from everyone they know — or risk losing educational and job opportunities, and face the prospect of harassment and even violence,” she wrote.....

I dont care if its unfair. Tough shit. You hurt children and you lose any sympathy I have for you as a human.

If "you hurt children". What about the pedophiles who don't hurt children? Like an alcoholic who doesn't drink alcohol?

Good point. However in the case of children I still dont care nor do I agree I should have some sympathy. Too much at stake.

 

[koshergrl]

You know what's "fair" for pedophiles? A noose!

You can't blame a person who is attracted to children any more than you can blame a person for being attracted to the same sex. In either case it isn't their fault they were born that way.

You can only blame them for the actions they actually take.

What harm does an adult male do to anyone who masterbates to pictures of children but does not actually pursue, sexually, any child?

Bullshit! I can blame them just fine, because I know that you CHOOSE what you are attracted to.

If I knew my boy was whacking off while looking at kiddie porn, there would be some serious intervention taking place.

It won't happen, because I have been frank with my children from the time they were very young about the nature of sex, and the necessity of controlling oneself in all aspects of one's life..including who you visualize having sex with.