HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Many researchers taking a...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 10:58 AM

Many researchers taking a different view of pedophilia

Pedophilia once was thought to stem from psychological influences early in life. Now, many experts view it as a deep-rooted predisposition that does not change.
As a young boy, Paul Christiano loved the world of girls — the way they danced, how their spindly bodies tumbled in gymnastics.

In adolescence, as other boys ogled classmates, he was troubled to find himself fantasizing about 7- to 11-year-olds.

His desires remained stuck in time as he neared adulthood. Despite a stable home life in suburban Chicago, he was tortured by urges he knew could land him in prison.

"For having these feelings, I was destined to become a monster," he said. "I was terrified."

In 1999, Christiano was caught buying child pornography. Now 36, he said he has never molested a child, but after five years of state-ordered therapy, the attraction remains.

"These people felt they could snuff out the desire, or shame me into denying it existed," he said. "But it's as intrinsic as the next person's heterosexuality."

In the laboratory, researchers are coming to the same conclusion.

Like many forms of sexual deviance, pedophilia once was thought to stem from psychological influences early in life. Now, many experts view it as a sexual orientation as immutable as heterosexuality or homosexuality. It is a deep-rooted predisposition — limited almost entirely to men — that becomes clear during puberty and does not change.

The best estimates are that between 1% and 5% of men are pedophiles, meaning that they have a dominant attraction to prepubescent children.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-pedophiles-20130115,0,197689.story?track=lat-pick





111 replies, 9358 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 111 replies Author Time Post
Reply Many researchers taking a different view of pedophilia (Original post)
AlphaCentauri Jan 2013 OP
el_bryanto Jan 2013 #1
randome Jan 2013 #2
AlphaCentauri Jan 2013 #4
Pisces Jan 2013 #39
zappaman Jan 2013 #75
hopemountain Jan 2013 #81
obamanut2012 Jan 2013 #87
obamanut2012 Jan 2013 #86
cecilfirefox Jan 2013 #3
Bradical79 Jan 2013 #10
Live and Learn Jan 2013 #21
randome Jan 2013 #38
redqueen Jan 2013 #40
randome Jan 2013 #42
redqueen Jan 2013 #44
randome Jan 2013 #47
customerserviceguy Jan 2013 #83
garthranzz Jan 2013 #91
4Q2u2 Jan 2013 #5
duffyduff Jan 2013 #6
Bradical79 Jan 2013 #9
ismnotwasm Jan 2013 #20
EOTE Jan 2013 #31
ismnotwasm Jan 2013 #45
EOTE Jan 2013 #46
galileoreloaded Jan 2013 #48
ismnotwasm Jan 2013 #49
EOTE Jan 2013 #52
ismnotwasm Jan 2013 #65
randome Jan 2013 #85
ismnotwasm Jan 2013 #93
randome Jan 2013 #95
ismnotwasm Jan 2013 #99
randome Jan 2013 #101
EOTE Jan 2013 #108
customerserviceguy Jan 2013 #84
Sekhmets Daughter Jan 2013 #53
Bradical79 Jan 2013 #8
redqueen Jan 2013 #41
randome Jan 2013 #43
Nye Bevan Jan 2013 #7
CE5 Jan 2013 #11
Orrex Jan 2013 #13
REP Jan 2013 #26
Orrex Jan 2013 #30
REP Jan 2013 #35
Aerows Jan 2013 #78
Orrex Jan 2013 #82
pnwmom Jan 2013 #90
Orrex Jan 2013 #97
pnwmom Jan 2013 #109
antigone382 Jan 2013 #92
Orrex Jan 2013 #98
antigone382 Jan 2013 #100
Orrex Jan 2013 #102
former9thward Jan 2013 #18
obamanut2012 Jan 2013 #88
Ter Jan 2013 #16
alas_babylon Jan 2013 #80
Baitball Blogger Jan 2013 #12
Zorra Jan 2013 #14
Behind the Aegis Jan 2013 #28
backscatter712 Jan 2013 #15
Warren DeMontague Jan 2013 #17
MADem Jan 2013 #27
Warren DeMontague Jan 2013 #50
Chathamization Jan 2013 #72
Rex Jan 2013 #106
Hugabear Jan 2013 #19
HiPointDem Jan 2013 #22
cali Jan 2013 #24
HiPointDem Jan 2013 #25
Spider Jerusalem Jan 2013 #51
redqueen Jan 2013 #54
Spider Jerusalem Jan 2013 #55
redqueen Jan 2013 #56
Spider Jerusalem Jan 2013 #57
redqueen Jan 2013 #58
randome Jan 2013 #61
redqueen Jan 2013 #67
Spider Jerusalem Jan 2013 #63
redqueen Jan 2013 #70
Spider Jerusalem Jan 2013 #73
redqueen Jan 2013 #76
redqueen Jan 2013 #62
Spider Jerusalem Jan 2013 #69
redqueen Jan 2013 #74
Yo_Mama Jan 2013 #94
randome Jan 2013 #96
HiPointDem Jan 2013 #71
alcibiades_mystery Jan 2013 #66
HiPointDem Jan 2013 #77
Jamastiene Feb 2013 #110
napoleon_in_rags Jan 2013 #29
Recursion Jan 2013 #32
HiPointDem Jan 2013 #33
AngryAmish Jan 2013 #34
HiPointDem Jan 2013 #36
alcibiades_mystery Jan 2013 #68
Logical Jan 2013 #104
HiPointDem Jan 2013 #105
Rex Jan 2013 #107
davidpdx Jan 2013 #23
Zoeisright Jan 2013 #37
davidn3600 Jan 2013 #59
randome Jan 2013 #64
Behind the Aegis Jan 2013 #79
Jamastiene Feb 2013 #111
obamanut2012 Jan 2013 #89
MrSlayer Jan 2013 #60
ecstatic Jan 2013 #103

Response to AlphaCentauri (Original post)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 11:01 AM

1. Ay yi yi

What is one supposed to do with that information?

Bryant

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to el_bryanto (Reply #1)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 11:04 AM

2. Treat it like a life-long disease, maybe?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #2)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 11:12 AM

4. it is worst than that


many experts view it as a sexual orientation as immutable as heterosexuality or homosexuality




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlphaCentauri (Reply #4)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 03:30 PM

39. Too bad. This disease harms innocent children and no amount of experts trying to tame the idea with

words like sexual orientation is going to normalize it. We are animals deep in our psyche and animals kill to protect their
young. How about experts normalize this immutable fact.

There are medications that can be given that lower the libido and take away sexual urges. That is the only thing outside
euthanasia that should be considered if this orientation is immutable and no amount of therapy works.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pisces (Reply #39)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 05:00 PM

75. I could not agree more.

Sorry if you got bad wiring, but if you do something heinous to a child, I don't care what happens to you.
I have zero sympathy for a pedophile.
More studies like this and soon the victims will be the ones to blame...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pisces (Reply #39)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 05:46 PM

81. i agree.

zero tolerance...the harm & suffering to our children perpetrated by pedophilia cannot be "excused".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pisces (Reply #39)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 08:14 PM

87. I think it is a "sexual orientation"

I don't think pedophiles are gay. straight, or bisexual. I think they are pedophiles.

To me, this doesn't normalize it at all, because of the issue of CONSENT with a minor ie there is none and never will be any. It is a crime.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlphaCentauri (Reply #4)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 08:12 PM

86. I believe that is true

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlphaCentauri (Original post)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 11:09 AM

3. Although pedophilia may be heavily related to one's "wiring" it is clear to say that, generally,

the abused abuse. It is a behavior that is repeated, we see this with victim's of sexual abuse, they are likely to act out that abuse on others and PERHAPS become predator's themselves. I have no doubt though that many pedophile's find their attractions unchangeable, and it is important we start treating it like that- not to soften up the way society feels about it but to treat the afflicted successfully, prevent further abuse, and give them a good quality of life. I've not seen much in the ways of biological studies of pedophilia- but I imagine studies of brain and hormonal chemistry might reveal some notable physical differences between pedophile's and non-pedophile's

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cecilfirefox (Reply #3)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 12:26 PM

10. I agree. -nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cecilfirefox (Reply #3)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 04:11 AM

21. +1 nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cecilfirefox (Reply #3)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 03:21 PM

38. Do you think the need to abuse can be redirected then?

Not sure if that's even a valid question, just musing out loud.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #38)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 03:34 PM

40. It is a *desire* to abuse. Not a need.

There is a vast difference between wants and needs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to redqueen (Reply #40)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 03:38 PM

42. If 'desire', in some cases, is wired with 'need', then there's a problem.

I'm not looking to excuse pedophiles, but maybe the study is correct and we need to re-think how such individuals are kept away from their victims.

The high recidivism rate implies that something more is going on than fulfilment of a desire.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #42)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 03:45 PM

44. The study showed these sick, defective shits were confusing wants with needs?

I dunno, I missed that part.

As for the human filth, some of the more loathesome apologists propose that kiddie porn be legalized, only computer generated or animated of course, so that "no one gets hurt"... apparently completely ignorant (willfully so, IMNSHO) that rewarding their indefensible appetites with as strong of a positive feedback mechanism as orgasm will necessarily increase their monstrous ideation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to redqueen (Reply #44)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 03:52 PM

47. "...a deep-rooted predisposition that does not change..."

I think that's implied.

I don't think kiddie porn should be legalized under any circumstances. I agree the risk is too great. Porn has an influence on those with established deviant tendencies.

But, again, if something like this article leads to better ways of stopping abuse, then it needs to be considered. I doubt this article comes out of a proposal to somehow 'legalize' deviancy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #38)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 07:20 PM

83. Yeah, towards a chimo's cellmate

Unless the roommate kills him first.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cecilfirefox (Reply #3)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 08:37 PM

91. FYI the abused do not...

become abusers in most cases. It's a myth that needs to end.

http://www.webmd.com/mental-health/news/20030206/do-sexually-abused-kids-become-abusers

But, while a significant proportion of male abusers were victims themselves, there's evidence that relatively few sexually abused boys actually become abusers.
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/psychoanalysis-30/201101/talking-about-sexually-abused-boys-and-the-men-they-become

http://www.smashwords.com/books/view/9997

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlphaCentauri (Original post)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 11:26 AM

5. Beware of Relevant Equality

Is this the way they attach their wagon to the Gay community and use them as a shield to further an agenda. I was born this way not different than X or Y. So if you shun me you are shunning the other groups they are trying to Glom onto. Let us not also forget the people who are just plain sexual predators. The man that molested me had varying relationships with women his whole life. Even having children of his own. His wife was not a beard either, he enjoyed the company of women. Remember this is strait out of the NAMBLA play book to normalize pedophilia and move society toward their view of consenting relationships.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 4Q2u2 (Reply #5)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 11:47 AM

6. Agree. This is truly disgusting.

I smell quackery all over this study.

Pedophilia is CHILD MOLESTATION. Period. It is not a form of sexual orientation or preference. This is about POWER over others.

The "study" needs to be thrown into the garbage can.

Next thing you know there will be a study claiming rapists "can't help themselves."

It's disgusting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to duffyduff (Reply #6)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 12:12 PM

9. What you want it to be is irrelevant.

You're not giving any reason to doubt the study other than some pre-conceived notion you have equating a possible sexual orientation with a willing act. Pedophilia is not child molestation, it is a sexual attraction to children. The inability to act on that attraction with another human being without committing rape isn't the same thing as a pedophile being a rapist.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bradical79 (Reply #9)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 01:35 PM

20. Bullshit

A child isn't able to give consent, whether desire is acted upon or not. Rapists don't get to define what sex is.
The studies come from the well known inability to treat the offender.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ismnotwasm (Reply #20)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 07:04 AM

31. You don't seem to understand this issue at all.

There are pedophiles everywhere who don't act on their desire. Those people are NOT predators. Equating pedophilia with child abuse is the very definition of thought crimes and does not belong in a civilized society. This has NOTHING to do with consent, it's sick and sad that you'd make that connection.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EOTE (Reply #31)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 03:46 PM

45. You miss my point

Sexual desire for children, is deviancy, not a sexual preference or orientation by the very reason that children are both not sexually mature and cannot give consent--ever. I said it doesn't matter if it is acted on or not. The desire itself is precursor to rape, not innocent fantasy.

"There are pedophiles everywhere"? Really. What is the basis for that statement?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ismnotwasm (Reply #45)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 03:49 PM

46. Thanks for the lesson, Dr. Ism. On which internet site did you learn that gem?

Have you ever seen "To Catch a Predator"? Do you really not understand how many grown men have an attraction to children? Up to 5% doesn't sound ridiculous at all, perhaps even low. The great majority of them DON'T act on their desire because they know it's wrong. It's those people who you sickly call predators. You believe in the thought police, that's disgusting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EOTE (Reply #46)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 03:52 PM

48. And the spate of female teacher/male student relationships. NT

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EOTE (Reply #46)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 04:04 PM

49. Actually

My SIL works with special offenders. I'm a health care provider and while that is not my specialty, I've attended forensic nursing conferences and have a some small knowledge of the issue. What's missing here are the details. How many pedophiles were molested themselves? I'd say a large enough number to skew any thought of trying to normalize pedophilia as a sexual orientation.

A little more experience than watching one documentary.

Dr. EOTE, are you defending pedophiles or trying to rid the conversation of emotionalism? Repeatedly calling me sick doesn't work to the second end and I would hope you're not trying for the first.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ismnotwasm (Reply #49)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 04:12 PM

52. I'm not defending child molesters, and you seem to be conflating the two.

Pedophilia, by it's very definition, means a sexual attraction to prepubescent children. You are suggesting that that itself is predatory and that is (once again) sick. It's thought policing and it belongs nowhere in civilized society.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EOTE (Reply #52)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 04:48 PM

65. So you are simply agreeing that its a valid

Sexual orientation, correct?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ismnotwasm (Reply #65)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 07:56 PM

85. If by 'valid', you mean identifiable, I would agree with that.

But if by 'valid' you mean approved of by society, I don't see that happening ever.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #85)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 08:44 PM

93. I mean

Sexual orientation, just as any other sexual orientation such as being heterosexual.

Why I don't agree, is because even if the desire is not acted upon, it is sexualizing children before they are physically ready or able to fully understand. It seems more a maladjusted sexual illness than a sexual orientation. It is in no way equivalent to what goes on between consenting adults; the sexual balance is extremely disrupted, and the desire for children is often out of an inability to sexually relate to adults, according to pedophiles themselves.

Legitimizing it with the word 'orientation' doesn't help to understand it. It muddies the whole concept of sexual orientation and undermines the power structures involved.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ismnotwasm (Reply #93)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 08:55 PM

95. I do see your point.

But I don't see the motives of any of the studies in this thread as attempts to legitimize anything. If the truth leads to recognizing pedophilia as a sexual orientation, then we need to know that.

The truth, even if painful or inconvenient (to use very inadequate terms, I know) is still the truth.

Of course much of this science -when dealing with brain/mind issues- does not easily bring definitive conclusions to light. But still, if the evidence leads there, we should not be afraid.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #95)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 09:18 PM

99. True

But really good studies are going to do more than point out the fact that a percentage of people are attracted to children. I doubt, reading through this thread there's been a large enough study sample to conclude anything. Demographics, history of sexual abuse--which has always been a factor in many convicted pedophiles--change the dialogue.

These studies arose from the thankless task of redirecting offenders fantasies, or to reduce recidivism. If, as the article points out there are numbers of pedophiles who are not acting on their sexual 'orientation' because they know its wrong, (clearly haven't been exposed to or reject, NAMBLA or other hetero organizations that espouse letigimacy) are in an ugly situation indeed. There is no way for them to have a satisfying sex life. If they act, they are causing significant harm as well as as rape, if they don't, they walk through life confused and miserable.

The word orientation carries a lot of baggage, as well as a lot of power. I think it better we develop early identification and treatment for pedophiles than toss the word orientation around.

Attempts the change homosexual orientation have proved dismal failures. I couldn't change my heterosexual orientation. What does that say about pedophillia? And what do we do about it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ismnotwasm (Reply #99)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 09:27 PM

101. A hell of a lot of questions are raised by this, that's for sure.

More studies. Greater study samples are needed before we decide if this has merit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ismnotwasm (Reply #65)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 06:54 AM

108. It's a sexual orientation. The "valid" portion is up to you.

Surely something you've thrown in so you can accuse me of "defending pedophiles" whatever that means. Apparently, in your mind it means not throwing them in jail for the thoughts that they think. It's clearly a sexual orientation due to the extremely large number of people out there who fall into line with it. But I'm sure you know better, Dr. What a laugh. Again, thought crimes are disgusting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EOTE (Reply #46)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 07:24 PM

84. You know what I call that show

"To Catch and Release a Predator" I hope there are vigilante groups out there not doing the release part, and that police organizations who figure this out are turning a blind eye.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bradical79 (Reply #9)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 04:25 PM

53. I had to read your post

several times to get your meaning...So let me see if I am understanding you correctly.

Pedophilia, is not rape if the attraction is not acted upon. If that's what you were saying, I agree.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 4Q2u2 (Reply #5)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 12:01 PM

8. Oh, I'm sure they'll try to equate the two.

Even if the science points towards it being an biological/genetic predisposition like hetero sexuality or homo sexuality, consent is the key difference. Homosexuality is fine because you can have consent between partners, not because it's "natural". If this evidence of pedophilia being a predisposition holds up, it does bring up a lot of ethical issues, and complications in how to deal with such people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 4Q2u2 (Reply #5)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 03:35 PM

41. +1000000000

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 4Q2u2 (Reply #5)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 03:40 PM

43. We need to look at the truth no matter where it leads.

When we see the truth through political lenses, we lose our objectivity.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlphaCentauri (Original post)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 11:50 AM

7. Many people fantasize about owning a Lamborghini. But they don't go out and steal one.

People need to keep their urges to do illegal and immoral stuff under control. And if they cannot do this, they need to be locked up in prison.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #7)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 12:26 PM

11. Yes but how many older men fantasize with being with a teenage girl

 

The law says they could do this with a 18 year old. What if the law said 16 was okay. How many men are merely constrained in their sexual desire by the law that sets the standard at 18. How many would try to date 16 year olds if the law was reduced to that age.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CE5 (Reply #11)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 12:33 PM

13. Is a 14-year-old girl old enough to decide whether or not to have an abortion?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Orrex (Reply #13)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 04:38 AM

26. Is a 14-year-old girl old enough to decide whether or not to raise a child?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to REP (Reply #26)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 06:51 AM

30. By themselves? In the US? Of course not. Why do you ask?

Because the reason that I asked my question is this: the issue is not resolved as easily as declaring the age of consent to be this or that many years. If we accept that a person has a certain level of responsibility, then we have to be prepared to accept the implications of that responsibility, no matter what we decide the person's age to be.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Orrex (Reply #30)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 02:31 PM

35. We're on the same page then

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Orrex (Reply #13)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 05:11 PM

78. Is a given 14 year old girl

Old enough to decide whether or not she wants to have sex? Because if she is pressured or coerced, I say the answer is no, particularly if it is by a man old enough to be her father.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Aerows (Reply #78)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 06:08 PM

82. But if we trust her to make decisions about her body,

Why would we not also trust her to make decisions about her body?


All I'm saying is that it's more complicated than summarily declaring this or that age to be "old enough."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Orrex (Reply #82)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 08:25 PM

90. Because in both cases the 14 year old should be able to control her body.

In the case of abortion, that means she should be able to decide whether to have one or not.

In the case of sex with an older man, he is the one attempting to control and manipulate her. We're not talking about two young kids here, fooling around with each other.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #90)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 09:10 PM

97. Don't you think that the older man might try to manipulate her re: the abortion?

It seems pretty likely to me, if he's enough of a creep to have sex with her in the first place.

You seem to suggest that she would be easily manipulated in one circumstance but not in another; I'm not so sure.

And can we agree that the age differential is a major consideration? An 18 year old with a 14 year old is very different IMO from a 50 year old with a 17 year old. This is another factor that IMO should weigh upon any honest assessment of the situation.


That's my point, ultimately. It's not as cut and dried as a simple age limit. The reality of the issue is more complicated than that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Orrex (Reply #97)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 04:12 PM

109. I think most states allow for sex with a minor if the other person is close in age -- though 18

would probably be too old everywhere. I think I've seen 2 or 3 years as the cut-off.

Yes, an older man might try to manipulate a girl with regard to an abortion. However, she could have one all by herself without him having to be around to manipulate her at that moment.

OTOH, it wouldn't be possible for him to coerce her into having sex unless he were with her while she was having sex with him. Which, of course, he would be. Always.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Orrex (Reply #82)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 08:38 PM

92. They aren't the same thing.

Denying a fourteen year old the choice to have an abortion is forcing her to bear a child against her will.

Denying that a fourteen-year-old is capable of consent means she may not undergo a physical experience that she wants to have (sex, that is), but it isn't forcing her to go through a physical experience that she does *not* want to have.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to antigone382 (Reply #92)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 09:15 PM

98. On the contrary, I'm not denying her anything

I'm respecting her ability to choose.

You seem to be assuming that this hypothetical young woman might not want to engage in sex with this hypothetical older man. Is that a certainty? At what age, in your view, is it certain that he'll have to manipulate her in order to secure her consent? When he's 15? 18? 21? 30? How do you decide? And on what basis?

This is why I maintain that it's not a simple matter. Definitely not as simple as an arbitrarily chosen age.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Orrex (Reply #98)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 09:24 PM

100. I don't think it's simple, but I do think there is a clear difference...

...between not forcing a fourteen-year-old to carry a child to term if she is not ready, and not allowing her the ability to consent to sex even if she thinks she is ready. Every woman or girl should have the right to an abortion if she wants one; it is a materially and morally different thing than consenting to sexual intercourse. That's my only real dog in this fight.

In terms of establishing an age of consent, I am tenuously comfortable with the age of eighteen, as that is the legally recognized age of true adulthood; old enough to vote and serve in the military is old enough to have sex. I also don't think that it should be considered statutory rape if both sex partners are within three or four years of age difference.

Beyond that, I would need to know much more about cognitive development than I do to assert a certain age or age-range for consent. I know that the brain does not fully develop until around age twenty-five, and it is apparent to me that even an eighteen-year-old is still childlike in many respects.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to antigone382 (Reply #100)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 10:17 PM

102. On the whole, I think that we're in agreement

Your last paragraph is particularly good and really gets at the heart of it; cognitive development is the underlying key, and the level of development varies even with a single individual. As you correctly note, 18 is old enough "to serve in the military" and "still childlike in many respects."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CE5 (Reply #11)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 01:23 PM

18. The majority of states are either 16 or 17 for the age of consent.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CE5 (Reply #11)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 08:20 PM

88. That is not pedophilia

It is criminal and repulsive, but definitely is not pedophilia. That is ephebophilia, possibly hebephilia. There really is a legal and mental difference (ie the latter two are sexual attractions to teenagers, not minors who are and look like very young children).

And, lots of older men DO date sixteen-year-old girls, even though the law forbids it. And, in some states, dating a or having sex with a girl that young is a felony, but it's legal to marry her. I do NOT agree with that (see Courtney Stodden and the actor Dough Hutchinson). I think if th behavior is illegal if you aren't married, you shouldn't be able to get married.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #7)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 01:11 PM

16. One huge difference

 

Lambo sightings are maybe 1-6 times a year. There are kids everywhere. And also sexual urges are not the same as material urges. I would not trust someone who fantasized about kids.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #7)


Response to AlphaCentauri (Original post)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 12:33 PM

12. Very frightening what this suggests.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlphaCentauri (Original post)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 12:55 PM

14. So pedophiles are overwhelmingly heterosexual males?

"Like men attracted to adults, nearly all pedophiles respond most strongly to one gender or the other — females far more often than males"

Looks like the gay hating RW religious freaks are proven to be 100% wrong yet again.

What a surprise. Are they ever correct about anything?




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zorra (Reply #14)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 05:01 AM

28. And how many missed that little fact?

These are the three most recent comments at the LA Times:

JManson at 1:47 AM January 16, 2013
I disaprove of homosexuality, but I was "born that way".
Now stop judging me you bigots!


Move On at 10:38 PM January 15, 2013
Also, the next implication is obvious: prenatal testing is to be mandatory for all of the unborn, and those that test positive for homosexuality and pedophila will be summarily eliminated from the gene pool:

Aborted!

PROBLEM SOLVED!

No need for "Gay Rights" anymore....

Thanks Progressives! I guess in some sick and twisted way, abortion can be beneficial to society after all?


Move On at 10:29 PM January 15, 2013
My my my, lookey see. The scientists are finally beginning to unravel the deviant mind. Guess what Homophiles? That deviant mind includes you!

Yes, you are born with it. So, it also seems are pedophiles. So it will also be for every other sick, twisted deviant mind: a genetic propensity for a sinful existence. Just as the Good Ol' BIBLE said it was! Amazing how accurate that 2000 year old collection of myths becomes once you understand it!

Sooooooooo, I guess there goes the whole "gay rights" argument right down the toilet, right deviant homophiles?

Well, as your pathetic argument goes, "It's all about love." "Bonobo monkeys do it so why can't we?"

Forget it! This story and all of the future science based stories will be your undoing. Homophiles and other deviants like NAMBLA, poligamist cults, beastiality fans, porno freaks, etc., etc., are now just as we've always seen you before the politically correct "Progressives" tried to redefine you:

FREAKS OF NATURE!


I just realized that last two are from the same person. I must say, after reading the entire article, I find it interesting, though I am still not quite understanding the entire concept of it being a possible "sexual orientation." From what I read, it seems all of them are also attracted to members of the other sex, but legal, in the same way, so if anything, it seems to be a 'glitch' in sexual orientation. It is interesting too that they make distinctions about types of pedophiles, though, like the overall study, it will be ignored.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlphaCentauri (Original post)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 01:05 PM

15. So how long until the Haterade-drinking right-wing jumps on this?

I imagine Bryan Fischer will be howling about this...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlphaCentauri (Original post)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 01:17 PM

17. It may well be a wiring issue. Serial killing may be one, too.

Still, the question remains as to what to do with people who are so dangerous,broken, and not fixable.

Obviouly joining the Priesthood doesnt work.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #17)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 04:45 AM

27. Gelding? Confinement?

There are no "good" answers, save that children must be protected.

I am disturbed by this article's attempt to link it, like it's just "one of the bunch," to heterosexuality or homosexuality. The big diff there is that those don't involve abuse of little kids.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #27)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 04:06 PM

50. I agree. Thats why I threw in serial killing.

At the end of the day, how much is clockwork and how much is orange is sort of a moot, if philosophical, question. The fact remains that these people are sick, broken and dangerous.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #50)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 04:59 PM

72. Thanks. I agree completely.

I also wanted to point out that no one equates heterosexuality and homosexuality with violent impulses, desires to remove parts of the body, schizophrenia, etc. I don't think it should take a genius to realize that not all the tendencies we're born with are equal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #50)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 01:12 AM

106. I agree.

Was going to mention another criminal act like serial killing. Don't know what physiological studies have been done on them as well, but it is another behavior that puts people in peril.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlphaCentauri (Original post)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 01:26 PM

19. Does not surprise me. There are plenty of mental issues that are hard-wired in people's brains

For example, true sociopaths or psychopaths.

Nobody is saying that we make sex with children legal based on this. Nobody is saying that pedophilia should be considered normal.

However, it is important to recognize that pedophiles may not be able to control how they feel - which means that "cures" would not work.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlphaCentauri (Original post)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 04:15 AM

22. OH BULLSHIT

 

there's no reason to think sexual attraction to children is any more 'inborn' than attraction to shoes, whips, old ladies or horses.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #22)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 04:30 AM

24. uh, clearly many scientists and researchers disagree with you, but heaven's

YOU just must be the one that's right. After all YOU declared it to be so on DU.

Ridiculous, honey.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Reply #24)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 04:37 AM

25. gee cali, & i thought we were friends now. but don't call me honey, honey.

 

Last edited Wed Jan 16, 2013, 05:27 AM - Edit history (1)

oh, & by the way, i can find 'research' and 'researchers' that support any position under the sun.

"many researchers" = 1 team at camh in toronto

big evidence for the inborn-ness of attraction to pre-pubescent children: 30% (of their sample of) pedophiles = left-handed.

omg!!!

but wait, 57% of presidents since reagan were left-handed!!!

are they at risk for pedophilia?

that would be ford, bush 1, clinton & obama.

In recent years the stigma has largely vanished; among other things, four of our last seven presidents — Ford, the elder Bush, Clinton, Obama — have been left-handed. (Reagan is sometimes cited as ambidextrous, and in his autobiography, Gerald Ford said he wrote with his right hand while standing.)

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/08/health/views/08klass.html


A pair of researchers from Northwestern University have for the first time analyzed real-world data to establish whether an existing hypothesis—that cooperation breeds same-handedness—is correct. Daniel M. Abrams, one of the researchers, explains to SciGuru:

"The more social the animal—where cooperation is highly valued—the more the general population will trend toward one side. The most important factor for an efficient society is a high degree of cooperation. In humans, this has resulted in a right-handed majority."

In fact, in an entirely cooperative society, the hypothesis suggests that everybody would have the same dominant hand. The reason? It should, in theory, help us share things like tools.

Fortunately, Abrams' analysis confirms the speculation. The remaining 10 percent of left-handers represents the fact that the human race isn't entirely cooperative.

What's more, a new model created by the researchers can even predict the percentage of left-handers in any group—humans, birds, or even baseball players—given data about the degrees of cooperation and competition within the social structure. The results are published in The Journal of the Royal Society Interface.

Interestingly, the study also confirms why there are a disproportionate number of left-handers in some sports~. While cooperation breeds same-handeness, competition favours the unexpected. In sports like baseball, boxing, or fencing, players are at an advantage if they're unusual.

http://gizmodo.com/5905296/science-explains-why-so-few-people-are-left+handed


The new model can predict accurately the percentage of left-handers in a group -- humans, parrots, baseball players, golfers -- based on the degrees of cooperation and competition in the social interaction.

“The accuracy of our model’s predictions when applied to sports data supports the idea that we are seeing the same effect in human society,” Abrams said.

Handedness, the preference for using one hand over the other, is partially genetic and partially environmental. Identical twins, who share exactly the same genes, don’t always share the same handedness.

http://www.sciguru.com/newsitem/13739/Shedding-Light-Southpaws-Sports-data-help-confirm-theory-explaining-left-handed-minority-general-p

CAMH researcher says:

Cantor’s research so far has led him to believe that pedophilia is a brain disorder, affecting the frontol temporal lobes. Also of note, a much higher amount of pedophiles are left handed compared to the general population. Cantor says, ”The only other groups that have rates of non-right-handedness that are that high are schizophrenics, people with bipolar disorder, people with autism.”

But he apparently doesn't keep up with the literature:

Brain. 2010 Oct;133(10):3113-22. doi: 10.1093/brain/awq160. Epub 2010 Jul 17.
Handedness, heritability, neurocognition and brain asymmetry in schizophrenia.

Higher rates of non-right-handedness (i.e. left- and mixed-handedness) have been reported in schizophrenia and have been a centrepiece for theories of anomalous lateralization in this disorder.

We investigated whether non-right-handedness is (i) more prevalent in patients as compared with unaffected siblings and healthy unrelated control participants; (ii) familial; (iii) associated with disproportionately poorer neurocognition; and (iv) associated with grey matter volume asymmetries.

We examined 1445 participants (375 patients with schizophrenia, 502 unaffected siblings and 568 unrelated controls) using the Edinburgh Handedness Inventory, a battery of neuropsychological tasks and structural magnetic resonance imaging data.

Patients displayed a leftward shift in Edinburgh Handedness Inventory laterality quotient scores as compared with both their unaffected siblings and unrelated controls, but this finding disappeared when sex was added to the model.

Moreover, there was no evidence of increased familial risk for non-right-handedness...Our data neither provide strong support for 'atypical' handedness as a schizophrenia risk-associated heritable phenotype nor that it is associated with poorer neurocognition or anomalous cerebral asymmetries.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20639549


There are *8* studies in the pubmed data base for a search combining 'left-handed' & 'autism'. the ones that are actual studies of the matter are based on sample sizes like *25*.

what kind of 'scientist' makes such claims as though they were established fact?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #25)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 04:07 PM

51. More than one study, more than one team of researchers.

Your assertions here are no more based in understanding of the scientific evidence than your assertions elsewhere that there's no causative correlation between frontal lobe damage and violent behaviour. And contra your non-argument there's not really any reason to think that unconscious sexual arousal is anything other than innate; it's rather nonsensical to agree on the one hand that an unconscious sexual attraction to members of one's own gender is innate, and on the other that unconscious sexual attraction to children must involve some element of choice and agency. This really seems like nothing more than an attempt to impose some wishful thinking re "free will" and indivudual agency on certain deviant behaviours--perhaps because if it's freely chosen then it's much easier to treat it as a criminal issue rather than a medical issue, although at the same time I'd say that's a false dichotomy; having the innate desire itself doesn't mean it'll be acted upon, if it is then it becomes a criminal issue...but recognition of paedophilia as a brain disorder may at the same time lead to more effective treatment of paedophiles and prevent them from becoming offenders.

Other studies:

Introduction.  Child molestation or other pedophilic behavior may result as a consequence of a brain disorder.

Aim.  To characterize the mechanisms of pedophilic behavior associated with neurological diseases.

Methods.  We report eight patients with pedophilic behavior as a manifestation of their brain disorder and review the literature.

Main Outcome Measures.  The sexual, neuropsychiatric, and neurological aspects of a series of patients.

Results.  All eight developed sexual behavior toward prepubescent children in mid- to late-life coincident with the development of a neurological disorder. Five had limited insight, anxiety, or concern for their behavior and tended to have frontal lobe executive deficits. Most of this group had frontally predominant disorders. Two others retained insight and concern in the context of marked hypersexuality. This second group had treated Parkinson's disease and resembled reports of pedophilic behavior from subcortical lesions. The further presence of right temporal lobe-amygdala involvement may have predisposed to specific sexual preoccupation in some patients.

Conclusions.  Brain disorders may release a predisposition to sexual attraction for children through disinhibition with frontal disease, sexual preoccupation with right temporal disease, or hypersexuality with subcortical disease in non-motor basal ganglia, hypothalamus, or septal nuclei. Differentiating these mechanisms of pedophilic behavior from brain disease could facilitate targeted interventions. Mendez M and Shapira JS. Pedophilic behavior from brain disease. J Sex Med 2011;8:1092–1100.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1743-6109.2010.02172.x/abstract;jsessionid=202AB1C2FC934EDCF2AA40456D6D5571.d02t04?deniedAccessCustomisedMessage=&userIsAuthenticated=false


Abnormal amygdala activation profile in pedophilia

Alexander Sartorius MD, Dipl. Phys.,
Matthias Ruf Dipl. Ing.,
Christine Kief Dipl. Psych.,
Traute Demirakca Dr. Dipl.-Psych.,
Josef Bailer Prof. Dr. Dipl.-Psych.,
Gabriele Ende Priv.-Doz. Dr. rer. nat.,
Fritz A. Henn Prof. MD, PhD,
Andreas Meyer-Lindenberg Prof. MD, PhD,
Harald Dressing Prof. MD

Abstract

Despite considerable public interest research in neurobiological correlates of pedophilia is scarce. Since amygdala activation is central for emotional valuation, arousal, and salience, we investigated the activation profile of this structure in 10 male subjects with pedophilia (exclusively attracted to boys), all convicted sex-offenders and sentenced to forensic psychiatric treatment along with ten male heterosexual matched controls. We used a sexually non-explicit functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) paradigm with images of men, women, boys or girls randomly embedded in neutral target/non-target geometrical symbols. We applied statistical parametric mapping (SPM2) and SPSS 14 for image processing and analysis. While controls activated significantly less to pictures of children compared to adults, the activation profile was reversed in subjects with pedophilia, who exhibited significantly more activation to children than adults. The highest activation was observed for boys in the patient group, and for women in control participants. Our data show enhanced activation to children’s pictures even in an incidental context and suggest the provocative hypothesis that a normally present mechanism for reduced emotional arousal for children relative to adults is reversed in pedophilia, suggesting a neural substrate associated with deviant sexual preference in this condition. More extensive research in this field would be of benefit for both the victims and the offenders.
Alexander Sartorius and Matthias Ruf contributed equally to the paper.
European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs00406-008-0782-2?LI=true


Pedophilia is Linked to Reduced Activation in Hypothalamus and Lateral Prefrontal Cortex During Visual Erotic Stimulation

Martin Walter
,
Joachim Witzel
,
Christine Wiebking
,
Udo Gubka
,
Michael Rotte
,
Kolja Schiltz
,
Felix Bermpohl
,
Claus Tempelmann
,
Bernhard Bogerts
,
Hans Jochen Heinze
,
Georg Northoffemail address


Background

Although pedophilia is of high public concern, little is known about underlying neural mechanisms. Although pedophilic patients are sexually attracted to prepubescent children, they show no sexual interest toward adults. This study aimed to investigate the neural correlates of deficits of sexual and emotional arousal in pedophiles.
Methods

Thirteen pedophilic patients and 14 healthy control subjects were tested for differential neural activity during visual stimulation with emotional and erotic pictures with functional magnetic resonance imaging.
Results

Regions showing differential activations during the erotic condition comprised the hypothalamus, the periaqueductal gray, and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, the latter correlating with a clinical measure. Alterations of emotional processing concerned the amygdala–hippocampus and dorsomedial prefrontal cortex.
Conclusions

Hypothesized regions relevant for processing of erotic stimuli in healthy individuals showed reduced activations during visual erotic stimulation in pedophilic patients. This suggests an impaired recruitment of key structures that might contribute to an altered sexual interest of these patients toward adults.

http://www.biologicalpsychiatryjournal.com/article/S0006-3223%2806%2901300-X/abstract


Assessment of Pedophilia Using Hemodynamic Brain Response to Sexual Stimuli
Jorge Ponseti, PhD; Oliver Granert, MSc; Olav Jansen, Prof MD; Stephan Wolff, MSc; Klaus Beier, Prof MD, PhD; Janina Neutze, MSc; Günther Deuschl, Prof MD; Hubertus Mehdorn, Prof MD; Hartwig Siebner, Prof MD; Hartmut Bosinski, Prof MD

Context Accurately assessing sexual preference is important in the treatment of child sex offenders. Phallometry is the standard method to identify sexual preference; however, this measure has been criticized for its intrusiveness and limited reliability.

Objective To evaluate whether spatial response pattern to sexual stimuli as revealed by a change in the blood oxygen level–dependent signal facilitates the identification of pedophiles.

Design During functional magnetic resonance imaging, pedophilic and nonpedophilic participants were briefly exposed to same- and opposite-sex images of nude children and adults. We calculated differences in blood oxygen level–dependent signals to child and adult sexual stimuli for each participant. The corresponding contrast images were entered into a group analysis to calculate whole-brain difference maps between groups. We calculated an expression value that corresponded to the group result for each participant. These expression values were submitted to 2 different classification algorithms: Fisher linear discriminant analysis and κ -nearest neighbor analysis. This classification procedure was cross-validated using the leave-one-out method.

Setting Section of Sexual Medicine, Medical School, Christian Albrechts University of Kiel, Kiel, Germany.

Participants We recruited 24 participants with pedophilia who were sexually attracted to either prepubescent girls (n = 11) or prepubescent boys (n = 13) and 32 healthy male controls who were sexually attracted to either adult women (n = 18) or adult men (n = 14).

Main Outcome Measures Sensitivity and specificity scores of the 2 classification algorithms.

Results The highest classification accuracy was achieved by Fisher linear discriminant analysis, which showed a mean accuracy of 95% (100% specificity, 88% sensitivity).

Conclusions Functional brain response patterns to sexual stimuli contain sufficient information to identify pedophiles with high accuracy. The automatic classification of these patterns is a promising objective tool to clinically diagnose pedophilia.

http://archpsyc.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=1107448#qundefined

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spider Jerusalem (Reply #51)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 04:26 PM

54. Did you actually read any of those?

The first one deals with late-onset pedophilic deviants.

The last one deals with a method of detecting whether somone is a sick fuck without strapping a wire to its dick.

So... yeah.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to redqueen (Reply #54)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 04:28 PM

55. They deal with neurological/brain function patterns in paedophilia

which is kind of the point? And yes, I read them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spider Jerusalem (Reply #55)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 04:34 PM

56. lol

Right.

What an odd "point"... that brains are involved with sexual response. Good one.


But hey, thanks for informing us that *some* pedophiles are actually late onset, influenced by brain damage.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to redqueen (Reply #56)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 04:35 PM

57. Sorry you are apparently incapable of comprehension

but the point here is that there's ample evidence that paedophilic behaviour is influenced by neurology and isn't volitional.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spider Jerusalem (Reply #57)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 04:38 PM

58. Yeah, no. That last one does not mean what you think it means.



I only read the first and last... maybe the rest actually provide some kind of evidence of something more substantial than "sexual response is linked to brain activity"...

Nice Google research fail.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to redqueen (Reply #58)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 04:43 PM

61. So what's your point, then? That every deviant is a 'sick fuck'?

Well, I doubt anyone on DU will disagree with that. Can we lessen the occurrence of predators preying on our children if we look at the neurology involved? I'd say it's worth a look since today, the only way of getting 'sick fucks' out of the way is AFTER they have abused someone.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #61)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 04:50 PM

67. Au contraire, the last study Spider posted shows

that we can weed out the dangers to society without even testing their tumescence.

Of course we will always have to wait for them to ruin someone's life, because freedom and thought police.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to redqueen (Reply #58)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 04:46 PM

63. Nice reading comprehension fail on your part

late-life acquisition of paedophilic tendency as related to neurological conditions and brain damage is supportive of an organic neurological cause for those behaviours, firstly; secondly given the innate nature of sexual response a consistent fMRI scan response to stimuli that discriminates paedophilic from non-paedophilic response further supports the correlation of innate neurological patterns as predictor and determinant of paedophilic arousal. (And "sexual response is linked to brain activity" is kind of the whole point here; the larger point being that "sexual response to children as measured by brain activity is specific to paedophiles and not non-paedophiles, and is the result of neurological differences".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spider Jerusalem (Reply #63)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 04:56 PM

70. lol

You're funny.

Like the way you conflate *possible influence* with "cause".

I hope you don't try to do actual science. You should stick to just trying to understand it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to redqueen (Reply #70)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 04:59 PM

73. Multiple studies showing involvement of the same brain areas in arousal response patterns...

in both paedophilic offenders and persons who exhibit paedophilic arousal as a result of organic brain damage...are kind of indicative of "cause" more than "possible influence". (Arguing for the psychological explanation over any clear evidence of a neurological basis hardly bolsters your own claims to scientific understanding, by the way.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spider Jerusalem (Reply #73)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 05:02 PM

76. Do you happen to remember the sample size for that one?

Just offhand... also, any thoughts about the control group, and how that may not have served as well as it might have?

I'd love to stay and play but this is getting old. Good luck.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spider Jerusalem (Reply #57)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 04:46 PM

62. "...influenced by neurology and isn't volitional."

LOL, I love how meaningless this is.

The two sides being debated here are not even really "sides"... They're just different ways of looking at evidence.

One says it is "hard wired", as in physiological in nature, the other that its likely influenced by childhood trauma. What seems to be lost in the shuffle is that trauma causes physiological changes in the brain...

It'd be hilarious if it weren't for the sick apologists who can't get enough of the pathologizing crap.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to redqueen (Reply #62)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 04:55 PM

69. Except that accepting that something may be physiological in nature isn't "apologist"

And there's nothing that says that the neurological and psychological/behavioural explanations may not be both correct to some degree (that having been abused may make someone more likely to act on what would otherwise be a latent desire).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spider Jerusalem (Reply #69)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 05:00 PM

74. "... there's nothing that says that..."

That's the whole problem, there's hardly anything that says much of anything and CERTAINLY nothing definitive.

So for a bunch of guys to start jumping up and down and insisting that ... whatever ... has been scientifically proven... well it's just... odd.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spider Jerusalem (Reply #57)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 08:54 PM

94. Not "behavior" - desire

If you blur the distinction between "behavior" and "desire", you remove the societal support system that helps a lot of these people NOT act on their desires.

That's why people are responding as they are.

Whether you're a sick person because of biological deficit or purely because of something you can control does not change that you are a sick person. If we want these sick people not to be dangerous, we are going to have to help them not to act on their own desires.

People who want to have sex with other adults are in a totally different behavioral category than pedophiles.

There are also people who are terribly sexually excited by hurting and killing others during sex. They're dangerous. Society cannot say "oh, you have no control over what you are" - we have to maintain the distinction between acceptable sexual behavior and non-acceptable sexual behavior, because those who have this desire probably don't intrinsically understand why it is unacceptable.

To say that sexual behavior isn't volitional is to justify rape, snuff movies, and a whole range of unacceptable sexual perversions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yo_Mama (Reply #94)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 08:58 PM

96. 'Not volitional' is not the same as 'approval', however.

All those things you mention will remain abhorrent -and illegal- to the vast majority of people no matter what brain/mind studies conclude.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spider Jerusalem (Reply #51)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 04:58 PM

71. None of those have *anything* to do with pedophilia being "inborn".

 

First is a study of EIGHT patients with real material brain DISEASE (e.g. Parkinsons) in which attraction to children manifested late in life when their DISEASE did (& as one manifestation of generalized disinhibition of sexuality & hypersexuality).

So it's utterly irrelevant.

Two & three say different areas of the brain activate in repsponse to various stimuli in pedophiles v. 'normals', TWENTY subjects & TWENTY-SEVEN SUBJECTS (subjects + controls).

big whoop, different areas of the brain activate in football players v. basketball players. This has nothing to do with whether such differences are 'inborn'.

Again, irrelevant.

Four says pedophiles show more change in blood O2 levels v. 'normals' when exposed to pictures of children. FIFTY-SIX total subjects (pedophiles + controls)

Again, does not speak to any question of "inborn". People who are sexually aroused show changes in blood O2 levels. Wow, earth-shattering news.

You have to actually READ the abstracts, you know.

The total number of pedophiles studied in these studies = FORTY.




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #25)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 04:49 PM

66. Some people have an inborn propensity to condescend

Usually by using "honey."

Well, maybe it's not inborn. Maybe it's just a result of a bad upbringing, or poor character.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Reply #66)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 05:05 PM

77. nah, i'm sure it's faulty wiring. there must be a study i can cite to defend that claim somewhere.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #25)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 07:26 AM

110. The reason for that is probably that Gerald Ford needed his left hand to steady himself.

Wasn't he the one that fell out of Air Force One, literally, because he was drunk off his ass?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #22)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 05:05 AM

29. Oh c'mon. Rush warned us:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2156871

Seriously and scientifically, even if its true it doesn't matter. Maybe somebody is psychologically attracted to making it with people in furry animal costumes. WIN for them, because in this wide world they can find a partner who feels the same, its a consensual activity. However if somebody is attracted to non-consent based activity, be it with an unwilling adult or somebody beneath the age of consent, then they are SOL: Their attraction, whether its inborn or cultivated, is to crime.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #22)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 07:17 AM

32. You may be confusing "innate" with "OK"

Lots of people are born with a propensity to do things that can never be legal. It doesn't mean we should make them legal, it means we should use science in how to deal with them.

I think Dan Savage coined the term "Gold Star Pedophiles" to describe men who recognize they have an attraction they must absolutely never act on.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #32)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 02:14 PM

33. people aren't born with a propensity to do anthing but suck & shit.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #33)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 02:24 PM

34. Grade A, blank slate nonsense

Much of our behavior is based on our biology.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AngryAmish (Reply #34)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 03:12 PM

36. all our behavior is 'based on' our biology. that's a different matter than claims some humans are

 

'wired' to have sex with pre-pubescent children or be serial killers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #33)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 04:51 PM

68. Agreed

Many of these brain studies will be recognized as the phrenology they are in 50 years. Humans are indefinite animals, despite thousands of years of searching for "essence."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #22)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 11:39 PM

104. Lol, scientific mined I see! n-t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Logical (Reply #104)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 12:51 AM

105. lol, did scientific mine? mined what? some people believe everything they read in the funny

 

papers, so long as it's prefaced by 'some scientists say...'

they don't have a clue about what science is or does or why some 'studies' get major play in the media & others don't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #22)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 01:17 AM

107. I would not classify it as sexual attraction any more then I would state

a serial killer is helping someone get up off the ground. Sexual attraction is not the same thing as predatory behavior. It is a mental illness that could be hardwired. We have to deal with these kinds of situations and not classify them as attraction of a sexual nature.

Sexual attraction does not involve mutilation, death and torture or should not in a normal, healthy relationship. I agree with you, but perhaps for different reasons.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlphaCentauri (Original post)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 04:20 AM

23. The big hole in their argument is they are making huge generalization

This junk science.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to AlphaCentauri (Original post)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 04:41 PM

59. I understand this is a tough subject and touches a lot of nerves

But speaking as someone that has studied some psychology, I think it is important to understand this....not accept it, but understand it. And right now we really don't understand this because it's considered so taboo that people don't even want psychologists to study it. Just execute them, many will say. That's not going to solve much. Evidence of pedophilia go back all the way through history. So you will never be able to execute them all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to davidn3600 (Reply #59)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 04:46 PM

64. Plus, 'catching' a predator occurs after the abuse.

If we can gain better insight into the causes, maybe some abuse can be prevented.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #64)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 05:11 PM

79. "maybe some abuse can be prevented."

That seems to be the point many are missing. Though, I do not care for the almost linking of this condition to an actual sexual orientation. As I said in another post, it sounds as if it is "glitch" in the SO hardwiring.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Behind the Aegis (Reply #79)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 08:05 AM

111. That is the part that irks me as well.

To try to come up with ways to prevent child molesters from harming children is a good idea and definitely worth looking into. I do not think most people would disagree with that overall assessment, if they could see that that is the point of studying them.

But, that can be done without the propaganda that has a pro NAMBLA mentality written all over it.

Calling it a sexual orientation is highly unnecessary and wreaks of propaganda, if you ask me. The NAMBLA-esque attempt to ride the coat tails of a legitimate civil rights movement irks me to no end. I can still remember when NAMBLA pulled that shit in the 90s, when they tried to attach themselves to the GLBT rights community. Uhm, there are miles of difference between what consenting adults do and what pedophiles do. I think in this case, I can honestly say the GLBT community has already expressed major qualms with them trying to add their initials to our cause. Hell fuck no. They need to stop those attempts, pronto.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to davidn3600 (Reply #59)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 08:22 PM

89. Agreed

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlphaCentauri (Original post)


Response to AlphaCentauri (Original post)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 11:22 PM

103. I too think it's a lifelong condition that can't be cured but

I wonder, do pedophiles always feel an urge to act on their attractions? For example, from my understanding, men experience attraction to different people all the time, but normal men don't feel the urge to attack, rape, or harm the people they're attracted to. Do some pedophiles have that same restraint?

Regardless of the answer, I would prefer that they stay in a camp somewhere, far away from children. That's the best I can do. When pedophiles cross that line and harm children, they should never be allowed to walk the streets again!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread