pederasty

Sex, Lies and Society III: Nambla

 “NAMBLA Walks With Me.”

Allen Ginsberg, poet


The causes of paedophilia cannot be ignored and further demonised if we are to understand and take preventative measures within society. Similarly, we cannot go to the other extreme and claim paedophiles have human rights and liberties equal to the needs of the child. The child does not stalk the adult. There is agreement that there is indeed a difference between those who believe they “love”  children, wishing to protect them, nurture them while also indulging their sexual whims (paedophiles-pathological narcissists) and those that crave victims to feel powerful, engender fear, sexual gratification, domination and to inflict torture and sometimes death (child rapists/sexual psychopaths) – the province of those ensconced in most of Establishment institutions.

Above all, biological and emotional differences between a man and a boy, a man and a girl and a woman and a boy are present for a reason, as any person of barely average intelligence can grasp. Strangely, this appears to be a minor point for those intent on sexual relations with the young. The paralogistical term of “intergenerational relationships” has been coined for a number of years and is actively promoted by one of many, though particularly vocal, North American Man/Boy Love Association or NAMBLA whose goal is:

“… to end the extreme oppression of men and boys in mutually consensual relationships by building understanding and support for such relationships; educating the general public on the benevolent nature of man/boy love; cooperating with lesbian, gay, feminist, and other liberation movements; supporting the liberation of persons of all ages from sexual prejudice and oppression.”

These highly manipulative concepts sit together with ideas of “ageism” rather than abuse, and which advocate freedom for all to choose what they do with their bodies. This can be viewed as a classic manoeuvre for pederasts, paedophiles and psychopaths to do as they please. The website is ridden with statements which say more about the need to justify sexual expression with teenagers and boys than it does about the freedom to choose. There is little evidence of love, rather an adult projection of physical desire that happily subsumes the child’s developmental stages into a body-centric and selfish consummation of self-love.

In other words, all that can be seen is a great deal of narcissistic out-pouring under the banner of liberalism and hedonistic freedom in order to justify the sexual expression of the adult towards the underage.

Benevolent and loving relationships are possible but there are reasons why a 40 year old man and a 14 year old may not have much in common in terms of experience, intellectual capacity and emotional maturity. There are psycho-biological and developmental reasons why a child must be allowed to grow into adulthood and to mature as a personality without the premature “flow” and undue stimulation of sex hormones. If there was real love would such a clamouring for sexual rights be an issue? Is this not evidence of the sexual act as paramount for the adult and taking precedence over the natural developmental stages of the child?

The age of the participants and the age of consent is still controversial. A 20 year-old man and a 16 year old for example is border line, but this is clearly a different case to the 35 year old and 12 year old, 40 to 10, 7 to 20. The fact that this issue has to be explained is disturbing in itself and is best encapsulated by a segment of text from South Park, the controversial T.V. animation series which satirised NAMBLA several years ago:

NAMBLA leader:  I’ve learned something today – our forefathers came to this country because they believed in an idea, an idea called freedom. They wanted to live in a place where groups couldn’t be prosecuted for their beliefs, where a person can live the way he chooses to live. You see us as being perverted because we’re different from you. People are afraid of us, because they don’t understand. And sometimes, it’s easier to persecute than to understand.

Kyle:  Dude … you have sex with children.nambla

NAMBLA leader:  We are human. Most of us didn’t even choose to be attracted to young boys, we were born that way. And if you can’t understand that, well, then I guess you’ll just have to put us away.

Kyle:  Dude … you have sex … with children.

Stan:  Yeah… you know, we believe in equality for everybody and tolerance and all that gay stuff, but … dude … F— you. [1]

NAMBLA are correct in that the law certainly needs to be far less ambiguous in determining what constitutes “abuse” and by whom. If an eighteen year-old “man” is genuinely in love with a 15 fifteen year old girl or boy, is this a crime punishable by imprisonment? Is this man to be placed on the sex offender register and sent to the State penitentiary along with violent child rapists? The case by case subtleties are not deemed necessary in our present appreciation of morals and values.

There are common sense limitations that are not seen as relevant by such associations as NAMBLA who reduce child abuse down to that of physical violence. Although of a different category that is important to note, perhaps even less harmful than violent and aggressive rape, the seduction of a child through “gentle” means is merely another form of coercion and will thus have effects and implications. It is a distortion of the complex mind ecology of the young. Studies that suggest sexual experience with children and adults can in the short term leave no negative effects is one example of this new move to see paedophilia as just another deviancy that should be allowed freedom of expression. [2]

Granted, though definitive data is “inconsistent” this does not mean that we should automatically assume that the assurances of paedophile advocates that child-sex is without harm. In earlier decades, trauma and obvious negative effects were not found. The overreaction and hysterical responses of parents was thought to be the cause in the minds of many, (who also frequently happened to be Kinsey followers). Consensual sex was found to be positive while non-consensual sex the opposite, with clear delineations of negative fallout in the child’s psyche. Either way, this does not preclude manipulation on the part of the adult to obtain what he wishes, regardless of the outcome.

Dr. David Finkelhor Director of the Crimes against Children Research Centre shows that there are studies which do indeed indicate delayed negative effects surfacing in adulthood. He explains it in the following way:

… A process in which a child’s sexuality (including sexual feelings and sexual attitudes) is shaped in a developmentally and interpersonally dysfunctional fashion as a result of the sexual abuse… Traumatic sexualisation can occur when a child is repeatedly rewarded by an offender for sexual behavior that is inappropriate to his or her level of development. It occurs through the exchange of affection, attention, privileges, and gifts for sexual behavior that a child learns sexual behavior as a strategy for manipulating others to get his or her other developmentally appropriate needs met. It occurs when certain parts of a child’s anatomy are fetishized and given distorted importance and meaning. It occurs through the misconceptions and confusion about sexual behavior and sexual morality that are transmitted to the child from the offender… Children who have been traumatically sexualized emerge from their experiences with inappropriate repertories of sexual behaviors, with confusions and misconceptions about their sexual self-concepts, and with unusual emotional associations to sexual activities.” [3]

Children, by definition are not consenting adults. Therefore, to suggest that sexual stimulation and expression of an erotic love to satisfy the adult’s desires, thus denying the child’s right to be a child, is still closer to a crime than anything else. Clearly, where cases of pederasty and genuine love may exist, and if there is indeed a loving relationship between an adult, then this love surely puts the other before one’s own needs. Until such time as the child can physically, mentally and emotionally match the adult’s, then this true love may be tested beyond the realm of the bio-chemical powers, where a strictly body-centric, adult preoccupation is not to be enforced upon the child, whatever the reciprocity.

To allow the free and natural sexual expression of children to occur in a supportive society, where sex is not reduced down to a product or a means to manipulate others seems to be a long way in the future. To encourage children to be sexually active when emotions are still forming and within the context of society as it stands, will more often than not, set up children for a big fall. Conversely, to be sexually repressive and guilty about their sensuality in such an ambivalent and fear-based culture is to exploit a natural curiosity about the senses and to deform the child’s spontaneous view into the wishes and desires of adults.

The idea of morals and ethics regarding the development of the child’s emotions is something that social science would like to place in a statistical test-tube as though data exists in a vacuum. Though apparently unfashionable in academic liberalism, a moral imperative does have a vital part to play in the development of child sexuality as Dr. Finkelhor explains:

“Ultimately, I do continue to believe that the prohibition on adult-child sexual contact is primarily a moral issue. While empirical findings have some relevance they are not the final arbiter. Some types of social relationships violate deeply held values and principles in our culture about equality and self-determination. Sex between adults and children is one of them. Evidence that certain children have positive experiences does not challenge these values, which have deep roots in our worldview.” [4]

It is also true that pre-school children are not pure white tablets of innocence, much as some would like to believe. They arrive with certain predispositions and a potent curiosity to learn and discover. They are walking sponges soaking up the tiniest emotional nuance. In this way perhaps, they do embody innocence. How far that is allowed to ferment and develop depends on adults as guardians and protectors who can facilitate a healthy curiosity about their sensuality rather than their sexuality at this developmental stage. The latter understanding naturally follows at a later juncture which requires the development of the correct set of emotional tools. These can only come from a guided understanding of the sensual world of which they are surely a part and without fear of being used and abused under cover of cross gender “rights” and “romance.”

NAMBLA not only seeks paedophile and pederast rights to effectively normalise pathology but they do this by infiltrating gay rights and setting themselves up as those fighting for sexual emancipation and civil liberties. Ponerised societies suggest that such movements stem not from a spiritual imperative for sexual freedom but to attempt to legitimize and civilise the indefensible. The help of well-meaning but sadly misguided academics misunderstand the very idea of human rights which is not about offering a panacea for sexual expression that may damage children in the process.

 


Notes

[1] From the animated T.V. series “South Park” quoted from ‘NAMBLA is … real?’ By Colin Megill, March 23 2005, dailycampus.com, University of Connecticut.
[2] ‘Psychological Correlates of Male Child and Adolescent Sexual Experiences with Adults: A Review of the Nonclinical Literature’ Robert Bauserman, Ph.D. and Bruce Rind, Ph.D Archives of Sexual behavior, 26-2, 1997, Psychology Department, 1012 East Hall, University of  Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48100.
[3] A Sourcebook on Child Sexual Abuse By David Finkelhor, Sage Publication: Newbury Park, 1986.
[4] p.45; Quoted from Paedophiles and Sexual Offences against Children by Dennis Howitt, Loughborough University, UK, Published by John Wiley & Sons, 1995.
Advertisements

Sex, Lies and Society II: Paedophilia

“Ex LostProphets singer, Ian Watkins: “Described in court as a “determined and committed paedophile”, Watkins, 36, admitted the attempted rape and sexual assault of a child under 13; conspiring to rape a child; three counts of sexual assault involving children; seven counts of making or possessing indecent images of children; and one of possessing an extreme image involving a sex act on an animal.”

– the Gig Cartel


Paedophilia – another form of psychopathy?

Paedophilia, from the Greek pais meaning ‘child’ is defined as an adult who is sexually attracted primarily to prepubescent children, or more literally, “one who loves children.” The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM 111-R), which is published by the American Psychiatric Association, defines paedophilia as: “recurrent, intense, sexual urges and sexual arousing fantasies of at least six months duration involving sexual activity with a pre-pubescent  child.” [1] Another definition that may give us an unambiguous starting point is from authors John Silverman and David Wilson who describe the paedophile as someone who perpetrates “sexual abuse outside of the family, of pre-pubertal children by a physically mature adult, which in extreme cases is a deeply ingrained, life-long, erotic preference.” [2]

Paedophiles, have a sexual orientation which finds children sexually attractive. This doesn’t automatically mean they act out their fantasies. Those that do may or may not have a history of sexual crime. We can also say that extreme acts of violence and sexual aggression committed against juveniles are likely carried out by child rapists i.e. psychopaths. An adult who actually engages in sexual activity with a child with the intent to aggressively rape and abuse the child is a child rapist. This is the kind of abuse that sees the child as an object to rape whereas paedophilia has some concept of “love” or gentleness involved, albeit highly distorted and delusional.

This is, however one defines it, still a form of serious child molestation, though perhaps with a more narcissistic flavour than purely psychopathic. Most paedophiles say they could never “harm” a child in the way a child rapist does.

Nevertheless, there are many different ways to harm a child.

We have also seen the label of paedophilia used as a slur against those who have an erotic fantasy towards, or sexual relations with an adolescent i.e. during puberty or post puberty. This is apparently another form of abuse which is named pederasty derived from the combination of pais (Greek for “boy”) with erastis (Greek for “lover”; cf. eros). This is usually a man who has sex with a boy or girl as the passive partner. Some professionals have attempted to explain pederasty as a sub-category of Ephebophilia which is used to describe those for whom sexual attraction and activity exists regardless of the sex.

Pederasty was famously idealized by the ancient Greeks and Rome as part of what could be considered a moral and educational framework, at least at that time. It could be said that the relationship was not only an excuse for adults to satisfy their needs according to this sexual preference  but was conducted within a wider philosophical belief of erotic love where the relationship commonly represented an overall teaching or “mentoring” which took place outside the family unit. It seems bisexuality was encouraged rather than an exclusive preoccupation with same sex relations.

One can’t help thinking it was merely a way of intellectually justifying a consensus for the practice of abuse by the elect… Yet, it was not only ancient Greece and Rome that favoured a varied fruit basket. According to Aristotle, the Celts had been quite keen on pederasty for some time as were the aristocracy and dynasty families of Northern Italy during the Renaissance, most notably artists such as Leonardo Da Vinci and Michelangelo. Beauty, in all expressions was to be worshipped – and sampled so it seems – regardless of its nature. [3] (Again, one wonders if the child had any say in that “adoration” however rationalised)

Pederasty was also practiced in ancient Japanese culture as well as in Mughal India until British colonization; amongst the Aztecs and Maya prior to the Spanish conquest of Mexico and in China and Central Asia until the early 20th century. The tradition  persists to the present day in certain areas of Afghanistan, the Middle East, North Africa, and Melanesia. So, can there be a cultural pederasty that is benign? It seems to depend on history and culture, but more importantly, whether or not the individual is merely a psychopath indulging his whims. In a modern, Western culture which I believe is already straining under social pathologies inherent at its very inception, pederasty will – 9 times out of 10 – manifest as symptoms of the sociopath or psychopath since they are already “inside the box” of psychologically compromised societies.

ancientgreek1Ancient Greek pottery depicting an older mentor (erastes) with his student eromenos who was to learn about wisdom and philosophy … and a bit more besides by the looks of it.

Paedophilia encompasses high degrees of naricssism and possible genetically inherited psychopathy or psychopathic tendencies. Whilst the paedophile can and does commit abuse under all kinds of self-serving justifications there are also many examples of what we can define as affection or a form of “love.” Psychologist A. Nicolas Groth explains:

[The paedophile] appears to have a high emotional investment in the victim. He seems to regard the victim less as an object and more with a person with whom he identifies. He is interested in maintaining an on-going relationship with the child so that there is repeated sexual access to the same victim over time, and his investment seems to extend beyond the sexual activity. There much more lovemaking and foreplay, kissing and caressing etc., in such encounters. Paedophilia appears to be equally distributed across all socioeconomic, educational, and professional levels. It does not appear to diminish with time. [4]

As mentioned, the child rapist is in a different category which has nothing to do with distorted erotic “love” which for the paedophile, may often be as a result of suffering abuse themselves. Rather, the victim is threatening to the offender; an object to release hostility and rage, or sadistic pleasure.  For example, in October 1, 1993, Polly Klass, a 12-year old girl from a middle class family in Petaluma, California became the victim of what could be called a situational child molester, Richard Allen Davis. This psychopath abducted the girl from her slumber party by climbing in through the open window, brutally raping and strangling her to death. There are obviously different degrees for such crimes where violence may be absent but the victim is seen as an object to manipulate sexually all the same.

Paedophilic child molestation could be said to fall into three groups: heterosexual, homosexual and indiscriminate. There are also the respective age groups such as adolescent, the middle-aged (and/or married) and the elderly. The former definition becomes less reliable when we pose some of these questions: How young is “young” before deviancy comes into play? What about adolescents “abusing” other adolescents deemed consensual by both parties? What part does the sexual precociousness of the emerging heterosexual/homosexuality of boys and girls play in the solicitation towards the adult harbouring latent responses of erotic desire? What are the distinctions between violent and aggressive abuse, as well as the blurring of the age of consent, experimentation and clear transgressions via the older participant and enforcer? How do we distinguish between significant and consistent interference and a one off aberration due to a myriad of external factors?

This is not to infer that even minor forms of abuse cannot be damaging, but to wrench back some clarity on the issue that may protect the child and innocent parties. One is dependent on the other. We need education that is clear and unequivocal and untainted by politics and sensationalism, though admittedly, that might be a long time in coming. If we are to get a handle on people like Ian Watkins and Jimmy Savile who were both in the public eye and masters of emotional disguise, what does this say about those outside celebrity and ensconced in care homes, prisons, day care centres the military and hospitals?

What of the female paedophile?

Statistically, they appear to exist in far less numbers than men. However, due to the taboo nature of the female paedophile massive underreporting takes place, likely covering up a high incidence of abuse. By 2009 this possibility had been confirmed with an estimated  64,000 women in the UK listed as child sex offenders with 20 percent of a conservative estimate of 320,000 suspected UK paedophiles listed as women.[5]

One documentary to broach the subject of female abuse aired in the UK almost 17 years ago.“The Sexual Abuse by Women of Children and Teenagers” by the BBC’s social and current affairs series Panorama explored a very taboo issue indeed. [6] The programme suggested that though female abuse may still be lower than male abuse, it was vastly underestimated in scope and frequency with up to as many as 250,000 having been abused as children by women in the UK alone. As we will see when we explore the nature of the lesser known female psychopath, it is because we have been used to seeing paedophilia as male dominated that we experience a cognitive dissonance when we are forced to contemplate the idea of female predators preying on children. We must also bear in mind that Watkins’ victims were in some cases provided by their mothers…And yet, this incredulity remains as strong as ever.

Together with a pragmatic evaluation of male and female paedophilia and psychopathy, we must  truly differentiate between the paedophile and/or pederast who “loves” his victim and the child rapist /molester who seeks to destroy the soul and body of his prey.  They are both serious abuse. The difference is, one may offer the potential for assistance in order to address and ameliorate his or her condition so that s/he can take their place in society. The other would laugh at such an idea and go on doing what is in his nature to do: prey on the vulnerable.

In my view, we have no choice but to understand the nature of these sexual deviances in the hope of providing cognitive and drug-based cures for the paedophile or pederast who places his or her own desires at the expense of the child’s. Condemnation for those paedophiles who want to be cured can only restrict the possibility of reducing such crimes. Cutting edge forms of rehabilitation and therapy must be paid for by society and afforded to those who want it. Most importantly, we need a new awareness of the crimes of the psychopath so that  preventative measures and societal protection can be organised.

Abusers like Watkins  showed “no remorse” for his crimes, using his public persona to get away with serial rape against the most vulnerable. This suggests sexual psychopathy and society needs protection against such people rather than wasting money on pointless therapy. (This realisation will become more pertinent as we explore the Establishment networks later on). Conversely, there are paedophiles who have committed crimes, served time and who are diagnosed as having the potential for combating their desires. Yet, thanks to austerity cuts and an historical underfunding they will not have the support available to assist them in battling these demons. In some cases individuals have taken their own lives rather than live with the truth that they are paedophiles.

Some would understandably say, good riddance.

Yet, if we are to tackle this pathology then practices which were having some success need to be researched and extended, not as some politically correct sop but for the sake of future generations and the promise of community stability.

The Offending Cycle

From a British perspective, authors John Silverman and David Wilson provide some important research regarding reasons why we must tackle the issue of paedophilia and the issue of “labelling.” It also places the focus on the equally irresponsible action of the tabloids in the UK and media abroad, where people are labelled as paedophiles through rumour rather than fact – often when they have been innocent of wrongdoing. This has ruined lives. The authors suggest that if we are to tackle this problem then sex offenders have to be given treatment rather than demonisation and condemnation no matter how justified we may feel it isn’t going to manage the the problem.

Discovering whether a paedophile is a damaged being  with hope for treatment or whether s/he is simply a psychopath exhibiting paedophilic preferences is the overarching challenge.

In their research, “Wolf’s Offending Cycle” is mentioned which they describe as “a measure used by forensic psychologists to plot the route which can lead to paedophile behaviour.” A poor self-image and low self-esteem leads to repeated feelings of rejection and failure. This energizes an already potent world of fantasy to which the individual escapes into whenever he can. If not sexual to begin with, then they may quickly progress towards fantasies and masturbation. For some paedophiles, child pornography acts as a short-term drug and in combination with other facets of an offender’s profile can be viewed as a rehearsal to actualize their fantasies. For paedophiles rather than sexual psychopaths, minor offences ensue, from loitering to the “grooming” of children. Guilt and shame may make an appearance but are usually overwhelmed by rationalisations, the severity of which may indicate how much narcissism is present. In some cases a spiral of self-destruction eventuates where they feel the only way out is suicide. This cycle is unstoppable by the time it enters the criminal justice system. Of those beyond the law this cycle must be fed without compromising their notoriety which is why we may find more psychopaths in power in this context than anywhere else.

It may be so that paedophilia cannot be definitely cured but the evidence suggests it can be preemptively managed in many cases.  There are individuals who struggle desperately to prevent these desires from being expressed, often at great cost. While methods of incarceration, medications and even chemical castration have proved largely unsuccessful there are progressive and beneficial programs such as cognitive behavioural therapy combined with psychopharmacological treatments. But the medical and political establishment is resistant to the idea of altering present programs on a larger scale. [7]

The lack of multi-disciplinary approaches to problem solving stems from the ponerisation of our institutions that continually prevent large scale adoption of creative initiatives. With such an understandable stigma attached to paedophilia, sufferers who do want to be treated are hardly encouraged to come forward in a climate of hatred. (Psychopaths of course would never give “therapy” a second thought of course as they are doing what comes naturally). Despite the low level of recidivism in sex offenders compared to others who commit serious crimes, the effects are far greater and enmeshed in the wider symptoms of pathology currently manifesting.

The following passage describes Julia Long’s evaluations on this matter. A psychologist and experienced therapist in charge of running HMP Grendon’s Sex Offender Treatment Programme (SOTP) in England she believes that: “… If you repeatedly ask people to identify themselves as paedophiles, then that becomes their identity. I have seen that within treatment settings.”

She continues:

When I was on the wing at Grendon there was pressure from all the other sex offenders to get everyone who had offended against a child to accept that they were paedophiles, whether that offender had offended against an eighteen-month old baby or a fifteen yearold girl. The more I thought about it over the years, the more I felt that insisting somebody accepts that as their identity, time and time again acts as a sort of risk factor. There must be lots of people outside that have fantasies about children, but who don’t offend against them. Perhaps that’s because their identity is so much more than simply being an offender. ‘I feel like offending against this girl, but I’m not going to because I’m a social worker, because I’m a father, because I’m so many other things that protect me from having to act out that fantasy.’ If all your identity is that you are a paedophile, that’s your label – that’s who you are first and foremost – then it’s almost as if you have nothing to lose. You are going to be a paedophile whether you offend or don’t offend. [8] [Emphasis mine]

The above refers to those who are usually former victims of abuse. Referencing those who are exhibiting an essential psychopathy this would not apply and would amount to a false appeasement with no remedy in sight. This also conforms to the notion of narcissism that is presently reigning as the primary effect of large scale ponerogenesis. If society is in the process of blurring or eroding traditional roles in favour of a vacuum of narcissistic and gender confused influences this may feed into stimulating latent pathologies.  Similarly, if you tell the child that he is worthless often enough through both conscious oppression and the “invincible force” of subconscious projection, he will become precisely that which the parent is ostensibly trying to “avoid.”

In truth, the parents are merely projecting all of their own accumulated abuse and /or narcissistic tendencies onto the child thereby perpetuating the cycle of emotionally “distant” or damaged persons. Children cannot be anything other than the negative embodiment of self-loathing and insecurity implanted into their own minds before any identity can be formed. This can be likened to the public’s role in projecting their fears onto groups and individuals manifesting the aberrant deviancy such as paedophilia. As the condition is pathologically narcissistic at root, this has symbolic and literal implications for society as a whole.

 Capture

The Hollywood offering on the subject of paedophilia is The Woodsman (2004) starring Kevin Bacon as a convicted child molester who must adjust to life after prison. It was lauded by critics and public alike and provides an unsentimental and thoughtful overview of the paedophile and his demons, the relationship to family, community, police and care services as well as insights into conflicting thoughts in Bacon’s character. These are the paedophiles in desperate need of help and who are left to perpetrate their crimes again due to revulsion and the consequent ostracisation. We can also see how this particular category of paedophile is used as the perfect patsy for the serial child rapists who inhabit the establishment and use such people as a cover for their activities. The latter paedophile has a condition akin to the drug addict or alcoholic all of whom need support to conquer or manage these demons, often neurologically hard-wired. To do so benefits our communities and societies, an understanding that is inimical to Official Culture.


Another former psychologist who also worked at the prison confirmed the data that in her experience much of what passed for paedophilia did not involve physical harm to children. She recalled that: “… some types of sexual offenders would be repulsed by the idea of physically harming a child. What’s driving them is the sense of wanting to be close to a child inappropriately and wrongly, and in the process of achieving this harm might be caused to the child which is terrible, but not necessarily posing a threat to the life of that child.” [9]

This is a key difference that is often lost in the hysteria of baying for blood while the true psychopathic child rapists within Establishment circles continue their abuse undeterred and with absolute impunity. The authors reiterate the substantial and consistent research that proves that paedophilia expressing itself through violence, coercion and the extreme end of offences such as torture, rape and murder is rare. As mentioned, this is the province of the psychopath and child rapist.

A report from the US Department of justice showed that only 3.3 percent of all registered sex offenders re-offend confirming that it is the smallest re-offence rate of all crimes. [10] At the same time, paedophiles can reoffend up to twenty years later. The difference between the paedophile that strives to control his need to express his exclusively sexual attraction to children, (which he defines as “love,” however narcissistic) as oppose to those with psychopathic tendencies of the child rapist, must be given the drug treatments needed to control these impulses, although the definitive curing of this condition may prove impossible without large-scale adoption of cognitive therapy and drugs.

While most predatory paedophiles’ behaviour follows an increasing trend that develops over time as a chronology of extremes, there are cases that present instructive insights into the complexity of the condition, not least the workings of the human brain. One example included a man with a brain tumour who became a paedophile overnight and obsessed with sex to such an extent that resulted in the molestation of a child. [11]  Other research indicates that endocrine system disorders may have a connection to the manifestation of paedophilia.[12]

This underscores the uncharted nature of neurology, sexuality and their connections to societal programming. Which means we have to be doubly careful with our conclusions, most especially when Establishment manipulations are involved. As opposed to wilful psychopathic child rapists who have no interest in curbing their compulsions (many of whom are to be found in government it seems) it is in all of our best interests that paedophiles, as defined above, are given all the psychological care that they need so that their crimes can be understood and prevented as any other addiction. Paedophiles that do not wish to act on their feelings should be given the help the need to ensure that it stays that way. Feeling something is not the same as acting it out.  Paedophiles used as a collective projection for all our frustrations and dark denials can only lead to pushing these pathologies underground. That way undoubtedly lies further madness.

Update – See also: The APA/DSM pedophilia controversy: Orientation or disorder?

 


Notes

[1] Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM 111-R), published by the American Psychiatric Association, Vol. 3 1987.
[2] Innocence Betrayed – Paedophilia, Media and Society By Jon Silverman and David Wilson. Published by Polity Press, 2002 | ISBN 0-7456-2889-3.
[3] Politics, Aristotle II 6.6. Athen. XIII 603a., Strabo (iv. 199).
[4] op. cit. Groth (pp.153-154)
[5] ‘Up to 64,000 women in UK ‘are child-sex offenders’’ By Mark Townsend and Rajeev Syal, The Observer, October 4, 2009.
[6] The Sexual Abuse by Women of Children and Teenagers UK TV Programme, Panorama, BBC1, 10 pm Monday 6th October 1997.
[7] TV review: ‘Breaking a Female Paedophile Ring; The World’s Tallest Man: Looking for Love’ The Guardian, by John Grace, May 26, 2011.
[8] ‘The Treatment of Sexual Deviation Using a Pharmacological Approach’ Journal of Sex Research, by John McDonald, Wilson Bradford, August, 2000.
[9]    op. cit. Wilson; Bradford (p.33)
[10]  op. cit. Wilson; Bradford (p.34)
[11] ‘Brain tumour causes uncontrollable paedophilia’ By Charles Choi, 21 October 2002, newscientist.com news service:  “A brain tumour caused a 40-year-old man to become obsessed with sex and to molest children, doctors have reported. The married schoolteacher from the United States, who had no previous history of sex offences, had an egg-sized tumour in the right lobe of the orbifrontal cortex, according to a report from newscientist.com. This is the part of the brain responsible for judgement, impulse control and social behaviour.”
[12] ‘Paedophilia and hyperprolactinaemia’ P Harrison, P Strangeway, J McCann and J Catalan Department of Anatomy, St Mary’s Hospital Medical School, London. The case of a man presenting with paedophilia who has found to be hyperprolactinaemic is described. There is possibly a link between paedophilia and endocrine disorders. The British Journal of Psychiatry 155: 847-848 (1989) © 1989 The Royal College of Psychiatrists.