Why are there so many pedophiles?

[Cayvmann]

Problem is, that's not pedophilia. Pedophilia is adult sexual attraction to pre-pubescent children.

A 15-year-old of either gender having sex with an adult is not pedophilia. The 15-year-old has likely developed an adult body, and is too old in any case to be attractive to a pedophile.

My thoughts exactly. It's not pedophilia to be attracted to a fully formed person. Irresponsible yes, predatory in nature, probably, but it's not pedophilia.

It really wasn't that long ago that these young ladies of the teenage years were considered old enough to get married.

 

[YeahDude]

Well it is dependent on a large number of factors and each is a link in the chain:

1. Child reporting act to responsible adult
2. Responsible adult responding appropriately to child
3. Police taking report
4. SA/DA pressing charges
5. No plea bargin occuring

Unfortunately he made hard statements. The average first time offender, which means the person was caught and charged and sentenced. The statement was that the average jail time is zero. So there must be something to support that statement, otherwise it is not believable.

The other statement was that the states first and sometimes only priority is to reunite the family, again that is a hard statement. There must be something to support it.

 

[Erigena]

There may be more offenders simply because there are more people, but the frequency of reports have increased based on the fact that there is more support for the child to do so. Children are encouraged to tell someone when they've been abused today than they were 20 or 30 years ago. I also agree that the media sensationalizes tragedies like this.

From what I understand, some offenders were sexually abused as children. That doesn't mean everyone who was abused will become an offender, but it's probably an indicator that those who were abused and became a pedophile as a result probably didn't receive the proper mental health treatment to deal with the abuse. To me the offender caused irreparable harm to the child and one time is too many. I don't have children, but if I did, I would stand in line to pull the switch on a person who sexually abused my child.

 

[CORed]

Unfortunately he made hard statements. The average first time offender, which means the person was caught and charged and sentenced. The statement was that the average jail time is zero. So there must be something to support that statement, otherwise it is not believable.

The other statement was that the states first and sometimes only priority is to reunite the family, again that is a hard statement. There must be something to support it.

If the average is zero, that means nobody ever gets jail time. Even one first offender getting jail time would make the average greater than zero (but still very small, of course) Based on simple arithmetic, I think we can dismiss that statement as false.

 

[Praktik]

My thoughts exactly. It's not pedophilia to be attracted to a fully formed person. Irresponsible yes, predatory in nature, probably, but it's not pedophilia.

It really wasn't that long ago that these young ladies of the teenage years were considered old enough to get married.

There's actually a term for that, Ephebophilia

Because most late adolescents have physical characteristics near (or in other cases, identical) to that of full-grown adults, some level of sexual attraction to persons in the age group is common among adults of all sexual orientations.[9] The term ephebophilia is used only to describe the preference for mid to late adolescent sexual partners, not the mere presence of some level of sexual attraction.

Such a distinct preference for individuals in mid or late adolescence is not generally regarded by psychologists as a pathology when it does not interfere with other major areas of one's life. Ephebophilia is not listed by name as a mental disorder in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR), or the ICD-10, nor is it listed as a paraphilia. This is as opposed to pedophilia, which is categorized as a specific disorder in those systems with its own diagnostic criteria. However, ephebophilia can sometimes be diagnosed as a disorder if it results in dysfunction or exploitative behavior, either under the DSM specification 309.2, "Paraphilia Not Otherwise Specified", or under the ICD-10 F65.8 "Other disorders of sexual preference".[10][11]

Researchers state that hebephilia, erotic interest in which centers on pubescents, has not come into widespread use, even among professionals who work with sex offenders, and may have been confused with the term ephebophilia, "which denotes men who prefer adolescents around 15–19 years of age".[12] It is concluded that "few would want to label erotic interest in late — or even mid — adolescents as a psychopathology, so the term hebephilia may have been ignored along with ephebophilia".[12]​

 

[Brainster]

With a nod to Magyar for entertaining levels of ridiculous, it's interesting (in a sad way) to note that there are a substantial number of female adults who abuse male or female children as well. The difference in response seems to be the largest reason why this type of abuse is so rarely reported.

When a 25 year old man has sex with a 15 year old girl, most everyone thinks he is slime, regardless of whether the girl consented. (I realize that her consent isn't worth anything legally, but it matters for the girl involved, to be sure.) I agree that it would be a rare sort of couple formed this way in which the man wasn't taking advantage of the girl and I totally support the prosecution of the man.

When a 25 year old woman has sex with a 15 year old boy, most people react by wondering what the woman was thinking and congratulating the boy. In rare cases, it is prosecuted, but not usually. Again, it would be a rare sort of couple where the relationship was sound and I support the prosecution of the woman.

I pointed out a few years ago this piece at the Huffington Post by Cenk Uygur:

Did you know that there was another hot 37-year-old woman in Tennessee (she was a former model) who had sex with a 16-year old-boy? That's awesome. Of course, they gave her jail time for that, which is unconscionable. That's almost as bad as when Bush accidentally invaded Iraq.

It's a crime these days to make a young boy's dreams come true but not a crime to ignore federal laws against warrantless eavesdropping. Go figure. I'm just happy that the kid got laid before they locked the lady up.

Well, you know, if she was a former model, it's alright, although that might be a little tricky to codify into law.

 

[Cainkane1]

I don't look at or otherwise acknowledge the presence of children because parents don't want men looking at their kids.

You sir are correct. As cool as kids are in this day and time its best to ignore a strangers child.

 

[Cainkane1]

This is a hard question to ask but should the "degree" of abuse be taken into account when punishing these people? Some abuse leaves no physical scars at all. Some abuse leaves the child injured. I'm asking this because my first cousin was molested this way. No injuries. However after her ordeal she was never able to enjoy intimacy with a man and her three marriages all ended in divorce. She was a virgin when she had her first marriage. Her father didn't cross a certain barrier and he died unpunished. Still she was emotionally wrecked for her entire adult life until she died of cancer in 1996. Perhaps with therapy she could have gotten over her ordeal.

 

[pgwenthold]

You mean where there were often no phones, much less cell phones and Internet, and people didn't know they could get help, and if they tried, they knew they might be blamed as a liar, and knew it was just he said/she said at best anyway.

How accepted was it? Is it comparable to something like non-sexual child abuse or spousal abuse, where it was considered "dutiful"?

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

How accepted was it? Is it comparable to something like non-sexual child abuse or spousal abuse, where it was considered "dutiful"?

A case in Canada reached resolution just last week:

http://www.canada.com/Priest+victim+gets+abuse+settlement/1580598/story.html

The victim did report the abuse. For her trouble she was forced to "confess her sin" to her abuser.

 

[Merko]

The Zoroastrian holy text, Avesta, claims that about 2500 years ago, pedophilia was a particular problem in the area around present-day Teheran.

 

[Darth Rotor]

In my humble opinion, the question requires a slight modification...

Why are there so many pedophiles still alive after their convictions?

I'm just asking.

Thank you, brother Fnord.

DR

 

[Magyar]

Could you please post some links to back up the statements in the highlighted red. It is unwise to make such accusations without backing it up.

In the highlighted yellow, I find this statement hilarious. Most times I hear the religious right blame the LIBERALS for wanting to reduce penalties for child molesters. Yet I have never seen a legislator even propose such a thing. I will check out the site you link to.

Edit:

I briefly looked over the site. I figure that if there were legislators actively trying to reduce penalties for child molestation then the site would have that persons name in BIG BOLD LETTERS. But alas, I didn't see any. Since you made the claim could you point to me where this could be found?

I only have a minute right now, BUT YOU obviously didn't look real hard on the site.

http://www.protect.org/Campaign/Minnesota/Minnesota-Circle-of-Trust-Campaign.html

Talks about the fact that in that state as well as several others you get NO JAIL time for incest.


How about this one -
http://www.protect.org/Newswire/Ohio/Fairfield-County-Ohio-s-stunning-priorities.html

Since there are no investigators for the crime it's rather UNLIKELY that anyone will be caught, MUCH less prosecuted!

Here is another from VA
http://www.protect.org/Campaign/Virginia/Virginia-Sunshine-Campaign.html

Click on the map and you will find that in just about every state there is something the local leg is doing that is making it easier for people to get away with these crimes and or offer less protection to children.

As for your yellow comment - I blame the religious right because of the fundi buybul mentality that like blacks, and women used to be, children are the property of the parent.
Thus they're excused for all kinds of range of behavior from rape to no vaccination.


Edit

here is another from TX
http://www.protect.org/Newswire/Texas/Boy-scout-leader-says-too-much.html

Where the judge and I quote "had a hard time deciding whether a molester shoulg go to jail or probation.
The ONLY deciding factor, the scum bag was a total ass in court. As if there should be any quetion that jail should be a requirement?

 

[Euromutt]

Meanwhile, I will refer to the same USDoJ BJS study to which I referred earlier:

Other BJS surveys have shown that 70 percent of all men in prison for a sex crime were men whose victim was a child. In almost half of the child-victim cases, the child was the prisoner's own son or daughter or other relative.

The average sentence imposed on the 9,700 sex offenders was 8 years and, on average, 3 1/2 years of those 8 years were actually served prior to release. The average sentence imposed on the 4,300 child molesters was approximately 7 years and, on average, child molesters were released after serving 3 of the 7 years.

Admittedly, that study is a decade old, but given that I currently have two friends serving time in state penal facilities for "communicating with minors for immoral purposes" or whatever the term is, first offense for both of them, I don't buy that sex offenders involving minors are as a rule not prosecuted or convicted.

 

[BTMO]

Meanwhile, I will refer to the same USDoJ BJS study to which I referred earlier:Admittedly, that study is a decade old, but given that I currently have two friends serving time in state penal facilities for "communicating with minors for immoral purposes" or whatever the term is, first offense for both of them, I don't buy that sex offenders involving minors are as a rule not prosecuted or convicted.

It *might* just be time to find some new friends...

 

[JimBenArm]

In my humble opinion, the question requires a slight modification...

Why are there so many pedophiles still alive after their convictions?

I'm just asking.

Because I can't reload that fast!

 

[fuelair]

Because I can't reload that fast!

And we're not normally the first to get to them.

 

[YeahDude]

I only have a minute right now, BUT YOU obviously didn't look real hard on the site.

http://www.protect.org/Campaign/Minnesota/Minnesota-Circle-of-Trust-Campaign.html

Talks about the fact that in that state as well as several others you get NO JAIL time for incest.


How about this one -
http://www.protect.org/Newswire/Ohio/Fairfield-County-Ohio-s-stunning-priorities.html

Since there are no investigators for the crime it's rather UNLIKELY that anyone will be caught, MUCH less prosecuted!

Here is another from VA
http://www.protect.org/Campaign/Virginia/Virginia-Sunshine-Campaign.html

Click on the map and you will find that in just about every state there is something the local leg is doing that is making it easier for people to get away with these crimes and or offer less protection to children.

As for your yellow comment - I blame the religious right because of the fundi buybul mentality that like blacks, and women used to be, children are the property of the parent.
Thus they're excused for all kinds of range of behavior from rape to no vaccination.


Edit

here is another from TX
http://www.protect.org/Newswire/Texas/Boy-scout-leader-says-too-much.html

Where the judge and I quote "had a hard time deciding whether a molester shoulg go to jail or probation.
The ONLY deciding factor, the scum bag was a total ass in court. As if there should be any quetion that jail should be a requirement?

I'm not sure if you understood my request.
Your Comment:

DO you know what the average time a fist offender spends in jail ZERO

My request:

Could you please post some links to back up the statements

My new specific reply:
Could you please provide me with statistics that can back up your statement. IE a link that SPECIFIES the average jail time for a first time sex offender
As pointed out byCORed:

If the average is zero, that means nobody ever gets jail time. Even one first offender getting jail time would make the average greater than zero (but still very small, of course) Based on simple arithmetic, I think we can dismiss that statement as false.

Your Comment:

most stated don't even consider it a crime and the states FIRST, and sometimes seems ONLY, priority is to "reunite the family"

My request:

Could you please post some links to back up the statements

My new specific reply:
Please provide me a link that shows that AT LEAST 26 states first and only priority is to reunite the family, in cases of incest of course


Your Comment:

Where you will find that there are legislators who are ACTIVELY WORKING to REDUCE the penalties for incest and child molesters.

My Reuest:

I figure that if there were legislators actively trying to reduce penalties for child molestation then the site would have that persons name in BIG BOLD LETTERS. But alas, I didn't see any. Since you made the claim could you point to me where this could be found?

My new specific reply:
Please provide me with a LIST of legislators who are actively trying to reduce the penalties for child molestion and incest and the bills that will do such


All in all I can see from the links you did provide that this organization is actively working to increase the penalties for child molestion. The one from Texas is a judge who sentenced a boy scout leader to jail I am rather perterbed that you intentionally misquoted the article:

Where the judge and I quote "had a hard time deciding whether a molester shoulg go to jail or probation.

Actual quote from the link:

Judge Melissa Goodwin was having a tough time deciding between probation and prison

Could you please answer my specific requests or are you going to tell me that I obviously didn't look at those links?

 

[jasonpatterson]

Most men (at least in my experience) DO NOT find babies especially cute, unless they think it's their baby. I find them annoying when they cry and of no interest at all otherwise. (I'm apt to go gogoo over puppies though. Could be a wiring fault).
Can't speak for women, but I've watched men and women on trains when someone comes on with a baby. The women- even pre-pubescent girls- tend to smile at the baby. Most men don't.

Dunno how typical this is. Anyone?

I love them, babies, in general, are great. I find the VERY young ones (under a couple weeks, let's say, kind of funky looking, but once they're vaguely human, they are adorable. I have gotten a lot of crap from women when I take my daughters to the park though. It tends to either be extremely condescending ("Oh how nice, a dad spending time with his daughters!" or even better, when they were babies, "What do you do when they need to change her diaper?") or wary of a man in general interacting with their child. It's much much worse when I am not with my daughters on the wary end of the scale. I don't think I'm particularly creepy or anything (I smile at babies, wave at little kids, and if they say something to me, I respond politely,) but apparently I set off the moms' weird-ometers.

 

[gumboot]

I don't necessarily like babies or small children, but for some odd reason they absolutely love me. Always have.