Our partner

Pedophile = A Useless Term

Paraphilias message board, open discussion, and online support group.
Forum rules
================================================

The Paraphilias Forum is now closed for new posts. It is against the Forum Rules to discuss paraphilias as the main topic of a post anywhere at PsychForums.

================================================

You are entering a forum that contains discussions of a sexual nature, some of which are explicit. The topics discussed may be offensive to some people. Please be aware of this before entering this forum.

This forum is intended to be a place where people can support each other in finding healing and healthy ways of functioning. Discussions that promote illegal activity will not be tolerated. Please note that this forum is moderated, and people who are found to be using this forum for inappropriate purposes will be banned. Psychforums works hard to ensure that this forum is law abiding. Moderators will report evidence of illegal activity to the police.

Pedophile = A Useless Term

Postby Truth22 » Wed Oct 31, 2012 12:51 am

If you notice, I never use this term (pedophile) to describe myself. The reason I never do is because it has become meaningless.

There is too much ambiguity, disagree, and variety of definitions. I think we should just get rid of the term all together. It causes normal people to be offended and feel like something is wrong with them and it cause cruel people to get a nicer label than they deserve.

I’ve seen the word pedophile used to describe things such as:

1. A single man who enjoys hanging out with children
2. A 30 year old who is attracted to 18 year olds
3. An 18 year old man who is attracted to his 17 year old girlfriend
4. A man who thinks underage girls are beautiful/adorable (a nonsexual attraction)
5. A man who is sexually attracted to post-pubescent children
6. A man who is sexually attracted to pubescent children
7. A person who is sexually attracted to prepubescent children (real definition)
8. A child porn collector
9. A man who molest children
10. A prisoner who has committed a sex crime
11. A man who kidnaps children
12. A sexual predator
13. A man who rapes children
14. A man who rapes and kills children
15. A man who rapes, kills, and tortures children
16. Etc., Etc., Etc.

My point is that since it’s used to describe so many things, it’s meaning has become meaningless. It causes people like me (a man with a nonsexual attraction to underage girls (category 4)) to feel confused. Like why are people even trying to associate my feelings with the feelings of an evil killer? …. It also incites unjustified rage. Because people falsely assume that anyone (even if they are in category 1 – 4) will become a member of category 9-15. These are just a few of the problems. I’m sure there are more.

Most of us know the true definition (# 7)…. But it doesn’t matter what the true definition is because people continue to distort the term anyways. I think that everyone, not just myself, should refer to themselves as by exactly what they are.

When you-all see the term pedo, don’t even react to it because people are most like acting crazy because they think the term refers to 9 – 15. Don’t ever feel like they’re talking about you. Even within the categories there is a lot of ambiguity. Like the word child molester. What does that mean? Some have gotten this charge for consensual hugging or kissing a teen girl… something many fathers do every day…. But it could also refer to a violent rape…. Or what about the term child porn? That could mean anything from innocent pictures of a teen girl in a bikini (yes some cases are that ridiculous) to an infant being violently raped (an obviously evil act).

My point is that I just hate all these ambiguous terms and labels because they group too many types of people together. Youth attraction should be defined like adult attractions (that is, be specific).

Just like attraction to adults, attraction to youths is highly variable. Attraction is not a simple issue. People are attracted to other people for billions of different reasons. In fact, I surmise that each and every single human being on this planet has a unique attraction and unique desires that are elicited by that attraction.

My attraction to preteen, teen, and adult girls/women causes me to love them more, not less. Adorable faces, expressions, and personalities make me feel more protective, more loving, more compassionate, more caring, more sensitive, and more supportive. The desires elicited by my attraction are a desire to love, protect, cuddle, comfort, adore, hug, make happy, kiss, support, educate, care for, console, and help. Now if we were to compare these desires to the desires of someone else with an attraction to youths, I guarantee theirs would not be the same. Some, might be similar, but no ones would be precisely the same. We are all unique beings.

Sorry this is kind of a mixture of logical discussion, ranting, and self-contemplation… But that’s how I roll. See ya.

Peace
Truth22
Consumer 1
Consumer 1
 
Posts: 36
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 11:15 pm
Local time: Wed Oct 17, 2018 3:41 am
Blog: View Blog (0)


ADVERTISEMENT

Re: Pedophile = A Useless Term

Postby The_Ghoul » Wed Oct 31, 2012 7:36 pm

Pedophiles target the weakest available prey. Such behavior reveals much about their own feelings of inadequacy. Hence, they are predators. Not all predators kill or torture their victims. Pedophiles just lack the courage and know how to carry out their plans. What you call self control, I see as litltle more than ineptitude.
"Almost all absurdity of conduct arises from the imitation of those who we cannot resemble."

"Life is suffering. Suffering arises from delusional ignorance. There is a way to end suffering. This way is the Noble Eight fold Path." - The Four Noble Truths
The_Ghoul
Consumer 6
Consumer 6
 
Posts: 537
Joined: Thu Nov 25, 2010 5:11 am
Local time: Wed Oct 17, 2018 3:41 am
Blog: View Blog (15)

Re: Pedophile = A Useless Term

Postby GinaSmith » Wed Oct 31, 2012 8:37 pm

The_Ghoul wrote:Pedophiles target the weakest available prey. Such behavior reveals much about their own feelings of inadequacy. Hence, they are predators. Not all predators kill or torture their victims. Pedophiles just lack the courage and know how to carry out their plans. What you call self control, I see as litltle more than ineptitude.


Misguided tripe.
GinaSmith
Consumer 6
Consumer 6
 
Posts: 1039
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2011 11:57 am
Local time: Wed Oct 17, 2018 3:41 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Pedophile = A Useless Term

Postby revolutionex » Mon Nov 05, 2012 3:48 pm

The_Ghoul wrote:Pedophiles target the weakest available prey. Such behavior reveals much about their own feelings of inadequacy. Hence, they are predators. Not all predators kill or torture their victims. Pedophiles just lack the courage and know how to carry out their plans. What you call self control, I see as litltle more than ineptitude.


1. Why are you posting a comment on a thread you clearly don't seem to have read a single word of?
2. What GinaSmith said.
If you love a flower, don't pick it up. Because if you pick it up, it dies, and it ceases to be what you love. So if you love a flower, let it be. Love is not about possession. Love is about appreciation. - Osho
revolutionex
Consumer 5
Consumer 5
 
Posts: 159
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2011 12:57 am
Local time: Wed Oct 17, 2018 3:41 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Pedophile = A Useless Term

Postby Confessor » Mon Nov 05, 2012 7:40 pm

Cool list of "definitions". Remembers me the "Scale of Evil" from doctor Michael Stone.

But paedophilia have a right definition, even if people uses the word in a wrong context.
It is a psychiatric disorder in persons who are 16 years of age or older, characterized by a primary sexual interest in prepubescent children.

Font: World Health Organization Classification of Mental and Behavioural Disorders, page 166
http://www.who.int/entity/classifications/icd/en/GRNBOOK.pdf

Non-sexual interest is not paedophilia. It's a nice person who likes children!
Sexual interest in old pubescents (11-14 years) is called Hebephilia.
Sexual interest in adolescents (15-19) is called Ephebophilia.
"I'm brazilian. Are you too? PM me. Let's share the pain together"
Confessor
Consumer 5
Consumer 5
 
Posts: 149
Joined: Tue May 01, 2012 7:29 pm
Local time: Wed Oct 17, 2018 12:41 am
Blog: View Blog (1)

Re: Pedophile = A Useless Term

Postby The_Ghoul » Tue Nov 06, 2012 6:59 pm

Raping a child requires a degree of sexual attraction to prepubescent children. Hence they too are pedophiles. What man claims, thinks, and does are all different. I would never expect one who seeks to garner sympathy to openly admit his desire for young flesh. Excuse my skepticism.
"Almost all absurdity of conduct arises from the imitation of those who we cannot resemble."

"Life is suffering. Suffering arises from delusional ignorance. There is a way to end suffering. This way is the Noble Eight fold Path." - The Four Noble Truths
The_Ghoul
Consumer 6
Consumer 6
 
Posts: 537
Joined: Thu Nov 25, 2010 5:11 am
Local time: Wed Oct 17, 2018 3:41 am
Blog: View Blog (15)

Re: Pedophile = A Useless Term

Postby GinaSmith » Tue Nov 06, 2012 11:10 pm

OK, I think I have to wax pedantic. I'm not a fan of pedantry, but sometimes it's best to prove someone is misguided rather than simply assert that they are.

The_Ghoul wrote:Raping a child requires a degree of sexual attraction to prepubescent children. Hence they too are pedophiles.


I presume by 'they' you mean those who rape children. There are two issues here:

1) Fallacious reasoning, specifically 'affirming the consequent'; and
2) A flawed premise.

With regard to point 1, the fallacy known as affirming the consequent takes the following form:

If P, then Q.
Q.
Therefore P.


Your assertion conforms to this form:

If a man rapes a child/children, then he is attracted to children.
This man is attracted to children.
Therefore this man rapes children.


The nature of the fallacy is probably pretty clear, but just to illustrate further, here's an alternative:

If a man rapes a woman/women, then he is attracted to women.
This man is attracted to women.
Therefore this man rapes women.


With regard to point two, the assumption that cases of child rape are always due to attraction to children is incorrect. (Indeed, one could point to a 'cum hoc ergo propter hoc' fallacy here.) Attraction may be an element in a lot of abuse cases, but on it's own it doesn't lead to molestation, and some abusers are not attracted to children but are seeking to dominate and control, or feel compelled to act out abuse of which they themselves were a victim. Here I am not so much proving the incorrectness of your premise as asserting it, but there is ample data available on this topic.

For an argument to be valid, the conclusion must follow necessarily from the premises. For an argument to be sound, it must be valid and the premises must be true. Your point entails a flawed premise, therefore the argument cannot be sound. And because formally it is an instance of affirming the consequent, neither is it valid.
GinaSmith
Consumer 6
Consumer 6
 
Posts: 1039
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2011 11:57 am
Local time: Wed Oct 17, 2018 3:41 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Pedophile = A Useless Term

Postby sylvievere » Sun Nov 11, 2012 12:07 am

Check and mate, ginasmith. A little logic goes a long way.
sylvievere
Consumer 6
Consumer 6
 
Posts: 239
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 11:45 pm
Local time: Wed Oct 17, 2018 3:41 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Pedophile = A Useless Term

Postby Robert_J » Mon Nov 12, 2012 7:17 am

Yes label are never good
Last edited by Robert_J on Mon Nov 12, 2012 10:11 am, edited 1 time in total.
Robert_J
Consumer 4
Consumer 4
 
Posts: 94
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2012 3:38 am
Local time: Tue Oct 16, 2018 8:41 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Pedophile = A Useless Term

Postby GinaSmith » Mon Nov 12, 2012 9:33 am

Hi mrkosher,

Welcome to the forum. I take it you're here because you intend to move on from what you did and lead a virtuous life in the future (at least when it comes to your attraction to children)? Does labelling yourself 'child molestor' help in this regard? I have done a lot of bad things in my life (though I have never touched a child inappropriately), especially when I had a drug problem, but I wouldn't want to define myself accordingly, as these things are well and truly behind me. The same goes for so-called 'survivors' of abuse: adopting such lurid terminology as a permanent label surely does nothing for their recovery? I'm not trying to denigrate their experience or yours, but I am trying to foreground the power of words to influence our self-definition and self-esteem.
GinaSmith
Consumer 6
Consumer 6
 
Posts: 1039
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2011 11:57 am
Local time: Wed Oct 17, 2018 3:41 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Next

Return to Paraphilias Forum




  • Related articles
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 25 guests