To Catch Sexual Solicitors

Say What?

Many have heard the term "sexual predators", and there has been a decent amount of publicity around stings where someone, sometimes law enforcement, pose as children to try to lure people into potential illegal activity. The most famous is the show "To Catch A Predator". I take serious issue with using the word "predator" so lightly. Yes, lightly.

People who go online for solace from whatever is going on in their lives may or may not be looking specificaly for children for sex. There are a variety of motivating factors for their internet use and behavior. It is also worth noting that most of the people caught were not previously registered on a sex offender registry.

Accuracy

First and foremost, I would like to start with a little bit about accuracy. One of the links on the side of this blog is to an article discussing the protection of children from online sexual exploitation and solicitation. In it, they discuss a survey that many advocacy groups have since cited to say that online sexual exploitation and solicitation affects one in five children. Except that the survey itself found that adults only accounted for 3% of the online solicitation discussed in the survey. In other words, online solicitation does not affect one in five children, but 3%. Already we see that online solicitation of children is overblown.

I have discussed in other posts how the term "predator" is not only overused, but misused. There is no consensus on what it means to be a sexual predator, and most sex offenders, who have automatically earned the label of sexual predator just for violating a particular statute, do not reoffend sexually. Of those, only a small fraction have antisocial personality disorder (that means that only a small fraction of sex offenders who reoffend are psychopaths).

Why does this matter, you ask? Well, if we as a society are treating every single sex offender, regardless of their actual risk level, as if they will inevitably reoffend, what do you suppose that does to the sex offenders in question? Have you ever heard of self-fulfilling prophecy? By ostracizing sex offenders, we increase recidivism. Common sense says that. The Center for Sex Offender Management says that. Expert therapists say that. Yet the American people, and people around the world, are stubbornly clinging to the idea that sex offenders are dangerous, end of story. This is a myth.

Using the term "sexual predator" to refer to every single person who meets the qualifications for the label "sex offender" overreaches the intent of sex offender laws. The idea behind the sex offender registry was to create a list for law enforcement to use when a sex crime with no further leads happened. It was originally meant as an investigative tool (if you want a full history, you can find one here). Now, it is a label that we use to ruin someone's life, regardless of the circumstances in which a crime was committed, regardless of their likelihood to reoffend.

Sympathy? Or Prevention?

Should you feel sympathy for these people? Probably, but that is not my point here. My point is that when you take anyone who has behaved a certain way, and treat all of them the same and ignore the reasons why they behaved that way, you have no way to weed out the people who will learn their lesson the easy way, those who will learn their lesson the hard way (or anything in between easy and hard), and those who will inevitably reoffend. Without being able to make those distinctions, we recreate the tragedy of the original sexual offense and allow it to continue. Not only does the behavior affect the victim and the perpetrator, it affects everyone around the perpetrator as well. That is why Women Against Registry exists.

And without those distinctions, we cannot sentence people in accordance with the severity of the circumstances in which the crime was committed. The people who could have just gotten help and re-entered the community now are haunted the rest of their lives. And the facts tell us that these people are not some small minority of sex offenders, they are 85% or more. Nationwide, over 600,000 people who can never move on and are treated the same as the remaining 200,000 or so. There are risk assessments that can accurately make these determinations. But we do not use them, under the myth that those who have offended sexually once will do so again.

Stings And Cuffs, Not Help And Empathy

One of the biggest problems with stings is that they aim to slap cuffs on whomever takes the bait, without regard to the consequences. As I detailed in my recent post about sex offenders, not all sex offenders are mandated to treatment as part of their sentence, even though treatment can cut recidivism by half. Studies show that not only do sex offenders not reoffend, treatment is extremely effective.

Why does this matter, you ask? Because the people who are not motivated by sex, but were just lonely and looking for the first person who paid attention to them, are now slapped with a label they do not deserve. Because the people who are seeking out children are a small minority, and they are now lost in the crowd of people who are not seeking out children.

Most of these people would do fine with probation and treatment. Most of these people need the adult equivalent of a 10-minute time-out and a chat about why they hit little Sally on the playground, and be asked what can be done to help them not do it again. A little planning session to figure out why Sally was hit, and how to avoid it in the future. The adult equivalent is therapy, not months or years in jail or prison. They need better coping mechanisms, better decision-making, a better support system of people to go to when they are feeling negative about life. What they need is hardly what they get by slapping cuffs on them.

So, what happens when you take someone who would ordinarily be amenable to treatment, wants to rebuild their life in a positive way, but give him a stiff fine and jail time, without being given resources to help him rebuild? That very question is the issue with the term "sexual predator" being used lightly. By putting all of these systems to punish in place, and not enough to figure out why the offense occurred and guide people to the help they need, we increase sex crimes.

Terminology, Again And Again And Again

The word "predator" implies an instinctive drive to prey upon something. It refers to an animal or human that seeks to get something by finding that prey and getting what they want. Mercy is not implied. Conscience is not implied. Mitigating factors are not implied, just the predator-prey relationship and the innate drive.

It is not a word that can be applied to most sexual offenders. We know this through the facts we have at our disposal that show that most do not reoffend. We know this through the expert therapists who have said... sexual offending is not about sex. It is about terrible coping mechanisms to deal with the pressures and trials of life. We have the experts, we have the research, we have the knowledge. But we as a nation, as a world, are refusing to believe the facts.

Therefore, I recommend sexual solicitors, or sexual solicitors of children. If we must make the same old mistake of defining people by the negative behaviors they did, then we could at least define them accurately rather than playing on people's fears, on myths, and on blind hype. If we are to use the weighty, loaded terms, let us use them on the recidivists, the true psychopaths, the minority that deserve such labels. Not on anyone we pretend we cannot understand because they are "not human".

"Comfortably Numb": A Journey Through Pedophilia, An Article By Ender Wiggin

Introduction

Ender Wiggin, who has been a feature on this blog before, has again graciously allowed me to feature one of his posts on this blog. It is about a fifteen minute read, but there is also a lot to process.

Why am I featuring stories from pedophiles on a blog dedicated to the primary prevention of child sexual abuse? Because unless we can understand what it is a non-offending pedophile goes through, and how they are different from the two categories of sexual abusers, we cannot firmly establish a line between a non-offending pedophile, a situational abuser, and a preferential abuser. Without being able to draw that line, we cannot be rational or be able help non-offending pedophiles realize that they will not inevitably harm a child.

The stigma against pedophiles and the barriers that interfere with their ability to seek professional help if it is needed is also a significant barrier to accepting the idea that child sexual abuse is preventable. I believe it is time to break down those barriers, because barriers are not helping the general public understand the topic of child sexual abuse prevention.

Pedophilia is an incredibly difficult condition to understand and empathize with. It is incredibly rare, and to most people it is very mysterious. Frankly, Ender has a way with words and personal stories that far surpasses my ability to tell a story of myself and my own journey through pedophilia. I think it is very valuable to hear his story, especially if you are prejudiced against pedophiles. Without further words, here is his story.


Comfortably Numb

A journey through realization, despair, lethargy, awakening and acceptance

This is my most personal post to date. I feel very comfortable analyzing things from a rational, logical, factual point of view and then putting them down into written word. Writing about my feelings, however, is a completely different topic. I hope this post gives a different perspective of what it’s like growing up and living one’s life as a pedophile.

---

Mylife took a dramatic turning point a little over two years ago. Even before that, I was never in denial about my attractions. I have memories of finding other boys attractive since as early as when I was eightyears old. As you can imagine, at the time I didn’t know much about sex — in spite of having discovered pornography (by accident) and with it masturbation two years earlier — or the notion of sexual attraction, let alone homosexuality or pedophilia. But even prepubertal children often know they feel something special that they don’t quite understand or know how to describe for some people, typically children their own age. In most cases, a boy will feel that something especial for a girl — they have a crush. In my case, I felt it for other boys my age. Of course I didn’t know any better at that age, so I never even questioned whether it was normal or not. It just was.

As I kept growing up, the boys I found attractive didn’t quite grow up with me. Up until I was about fourteen I would still find enough boys my age attractive to not think too much of it. At that age I was more aware of sexuality and started really worrying about being gay. Having been brought up in a Catholic household, it was a very scary thought. In addition, homosexuality wasn’t nearly as discussed in the open as it is today, let alone accepted by society in general. However, I always knew that I found a lot of younger boys attractive. This would typically be the younger brothers of my age peers who I knew from my neighborhood or from school, or simply boys I would see in movies and TV shows. This went on for the next couple of years. I don’t even know where or when I ever heard the term pedophile for the first time, but I’m pretty sure it wasn’t until much later that the notion of there being adults interested in sex with children even crept into my consciousness.

Up until I was about sixteen I just kept hoping that I was just a ‘normal’ gay boy, and that this would be some kind of phase that would eventually pass. Even if I didn’t consciously know about pedophiles I already knew that something was really off. Now it wasn’t just my friends’ younger brothers that were perhaps two or three years younger than me. It couldn’t possibly be normal for me to develop intense crushes on boys eight years younger than me, and to have sexual fantasies about boys so young. I was so confused. Was I just gay? What the heck was wrong with me? Why me? I still on occasion thought that I would eventually have to come out to my family as gay, and the thought terrified me. When you’re brought up in an environment where your parents have never talked to you about sexuality, and where you are afraid that they will not understand and they could stop loving you, how does one deal with that pain? Who does one talk to? What is one supposed to do?

The pain is so unbearable that there is only one way out. You numb your feelings enough to survive, to go through your life weathering the storm as best as you can. You put on a mask and learn to pretend that you’re OK when you’re anything but. You daydream about running away but can’t quite figure out where you’d go. You build a wall around your very soul and you don’t let anyone penetrate it, because you are certain that they will be so disgusted by what they see inside that you just can’t bear the thought. So you never talk about anything substantial with your friends, your siblings or your parents. You become a stranger to everyone in your life. You wear the mask. You become the mask. You become comfortably numb.

---

There’s a beautiful Oscar-nominated Irish animated movie called Song of the Sea, in which a boy named Ben discovers that the fantastic world of legendary mythical creatures from the stories his disappeared mother used to tell him when he was little are true, including the fact that his sister Saoirse is a selkie — a mythical creature with a woman’s body on land that turns into a seal in the sea — just like his mother was. There is an Owl Witch named Macha who helps you escape your pain by taking away your negative feelings and bottling them up — literally — in jars. But there is a hefty price to pay. The more you bottle up your feelings, the more and more numb you become, until you turn into stone.

In the movie, the giant Mac Lir’s heart was broken, and the pain was so intense that he cried an entire ocean. In order to save him from the pain, his mother Macha the Owl Witch took away his feelings, and turned him into stone. Thus, he became the island which can be seen from the lighthouse where Ben lives with his family. I became the stone giant. The pain was just too much to bear. I resigned myself to the idea that I would never know love. I would always be alone.

---

Thus I lived my life; the great pretender. I was social enough. I hung out with my friends from college, while my parents—or anyone else in my life, for that matter — never suspected there was anything wrong with me. I became so adept at wearing my mask and hiding my feelings.

Until one day someone you’ve known for a while does something unexpected and tells you she has feelings for you in a quite unconventional way. And you freak out. And you freeze. So you don’t react. You do nothing. It’s just too scary and you’re too afraid to move.

You’ve already given up on being normal, or even a ‘normal gay guy’. But you wonder, and you ask yourself. If I was normal. If only. Sure, you have some girl friends (not girlfriends) and you like them enough—as friends. In that kind of awkward friendship you can build with someone when you’re constantly wearing a mask and checking that the fortified walls around your soul are properly manned to protect you from assault. You’ve never been attracted to them. Not that way. Not the way a guy your age is supposed to be attracted to a girl. Not the way your friends talk about the girls they’re attracted to. But you do like them. And you realize there’s someone you like a little differently, a little more. She’s the one that you think about when you think “if I was normal”. Because she’s an amazing human being, the kindest heart you’ve ever known. And she happens to be the one that shakes your entire world by telling you about her feelings for you. What do you do? How do you react? You try to pretend like nothing happened and you do nothing. You’re literally too scared.

Until something happens and you just can’t hide anymore. You can’t hide from her. You can’t hide from yourself. So you have to meet up with her. You tell her you like her, but you’re unsure if you’re even capable of loving someone. You tell her that you hate yourself, even if you can’t say why, and that you find it hard to believe that anyone would want to be with you. But she tells you that she sees something in you, even though you’re largely a mystery to her — as you are to everyone in your life. She can sense the pain, though she doesn’t know exactly what it is, and has no idea where it comes from.

You don’t want to lie to her. You really don’t. You don’t want to hurt her. She says she wants to know you, but you know you can’t let anyone know you. Notthe real you. You can’t let them penetrate that wall. It would be… no — you just can’t. You never even think about it at a conscious level. You just know it’s impossible. You don’t even make a decision. It’s not even an option. But you try. You really want to be normal, so you try to be normal. And it hurts. Being in a relationship with someone is scary when you have never let anyone come close to you before. When — in addition — you have a secret as terrible as this one, it’s even harder. When you have numbed your feelings so much that you don’t even know what you feel, how do you express them?

And she helps you, and you learn to open up, little by little. But you keep that secret hidden, because you don’t know otherwise. Because that’s just what you do. Who in their right mind would do any different? And you start to build something. A family. And they’re all that you’ve ever done that is good, or so it feels to you. But you’re still comfortably numb, it’s too scary and painful to feel. You’re not in denial — you know well what you are. What you’re attracted to. You just haven’t named it. It’s just there in the back of your mind, and you ignore it, even though you notice it every day. And time goes by. The months turn into years; the years into a decade. I lived my life in lethargy. In an emotional auto-pilot.

---

Ithappened unexpectedly, the awakening. I was traveling for work when, back in my hotel in the evening, I came across a YouTube video by James Cantor talking about pedophilia. How? Why? I don’t even remember what led me to it. The Pedophile’s Brain. Yeah, of course I’ve heard that word before. So why had I never thought of myself as… that? It hit me like a truckload of bricks. My memory is hazy afterwards. I don’t know how that led me to an article, and then another article. And one of those articles led me to theVirtuous Pedophiles website.

I sat there in my hotel room, reading the stories of other people like me featured on the main page. People struggling with the same pain. And suddenly tears are rolling down my face. I fill in the contact form to access the peer support forum, but it takes some time to get a reply. My mind is racing. The next morning I catch a flight home. I spend the entire flight crying. I think about getting back to a wife who doesn’t know her husband; children whose father will never be able to let them know him. How could I do that to them? It’s not fair. She doesn’t deserve this. They don’t deserve this. But what can I do? This is what I am. This is who I am.

I get home, and I have to keep wearing my mask. Thank God I can do this so well. So many years of practice. I can’t let her see the turmoil inside, lest she asks. I finally get access to the VirPed support group, and I introduce myself. I refer to myself as a pedophile for the first time in my life. I cringe. The welcome is soothing. They get it. They understand. I get involved, receiving support and at the same time giving it to other members, new and old. Giving is more healing than taking. And quite soon it happens. You hear people telling stories of how they came out — or were outed — to their loved ones, and how they were accepted, forgiven — if necessary — and supported. Wait, what?Is this really possible? Can one say this about oneself, and not be rejected automatically? I also hear some horror stories about just that; unfortunately not everyone can be so understanding and accepting. Unconditional love exists, but there is no guarantee.

Thus the urge starts to grow. Should I tell her? I want to tell her. How will she react? Will she be able to forgive me? Will I lose her? Will I lose my children?The numbness is gone. Everything hurts now. I cry easily. Way too easily. Hiding that something is really wrong with me becomes harder than it’s ever been. The burden is so heavy now. It weighs me down. I wouldn’t know until later that these are symptoms of clinical depression. But I somehow keep battling it out of sheer willpower for several months, while I struggle with the decision of whether I should or should not tell her. I have many reasons to, but are they the right ones? Is it just because I want my conscience to be clean? Because I want to feel better? Because I can’t bear the pain of carrying this burden by myself any longer? I have many reasons not to. Good reasons. I don’t want to lose them. I don’t want to place my burden on her. I convince myself, several times, that the risks outweigh the benefits.

I keep involved in the VirPed community and I start building friendships. These are strangers from the internet and somehow they know me better than anyone ever knew my in real life, including my parents, siblings or wife. There are no barriers with these people; no masks. They understand, and they’re there for you when you need them. You’re there for them when they need you. You take great solace from being able to help them, and they accompany you through this difficult time. They help you put things into perspective and ultimately become instrumental in you making the toughest decision you’ve ever had to make in your entire life.

It started as a therapeutic exercise. A letter. I didn’t plan on giving it to her. It took months to write, and many tears were poured over it. Many late night conversations with my friends on the forum. Many sleepless hours at night lying by my wife’s side in bed, wondering what would happen. Praying. Dreading.

One night, after yet another business trip, I knew it was the time, and I gave her the letter after the kids were asleep. Instead of having a nervous breakdown while she read it as I had imagined countless times, I felt an inexplicable calm. And cold. I was waiting somewhere else in the house, and when I heard her footsteps coming towards me, that’s when I crumbled and started to cry. We hugged, very tightly. She was crying too. I’m sorry. It’s all I can say. I’m sorry. The mask was off. For the first time in my life, someone knew me. All of me.

There’s a lot of tears. Some tough questions. And a lot of love. Unconditional love. There’s forgiveness, and acceptance. Acceptance feels like such a balm. It’s hard to describe. Like after-sun lotion on skin burned by a summer sun.

---

Ireally am a different person now. It hasn’t been easy. She’s been incredibly understanding, sympathetic and supportive. I definitely do not deserve her — and yet here I am. It’s hard to cope with this knowledge, for both of us. For me, knowing that someone knows this part of me that has remained a secret for so long. For her, well, it’s kind of obvious.

She encouraged me to seek some form of in-real-life support, and I started seeing a therapist, which has been incredibly helpful. No, she wasn’t expecting to cure me, and neither was I. But being able to process of all those repressed feelings from so many years back has been incredibly liberating. My therapist has been amazing. I’ve also been taking medication, which has helped with the depression, and I’m doing much better.

I never needed therapy to know I couldn’t act on my attractions. It was never even an option for me. No one had to ever tell me it was wrong, it just felt wrong. Even growing up when I was still a teenager, it was just something that never even crossed my mind. I don’t need therapy to not be a danger to children. I never have. And I don’t need therapy to ‘cure’ me, because it just can’t.

Therapy has helped me accept myself. Accept that I am what I am, and that I am a worthy human being. In fact, I’m probably a better human being because of it. Because if I wasn’t like I am, perhaps I’d be more intolerant towards others. Being part of a hated minority does give you some perspective on things. Before all of this, though, I don’t think I had accepted it. I had resigned myself to it, if anything. But that’s not the same thing.

As a practicing Catholic, I also sought support from a priest I knew. I came out to him shortly after, and he has been incredibly supportive and understanding. His acceptance has meant a lot to me at a personal level. He also helped me understand that if I am the way I am it’s because God has wanted me to be this way. I can’t fathom why, but it does bring me comfort. God has not only made me this way, but he loves me and accepts me just as I am. And He will never turn His back on me. Many people of faith will say that I ought to pray every day to be rid of this condition, to be ‘healed’. Pray the pedo away. And if I don’t succeed, it’s because my faith wasn’t strong enough. Perhaps it isn’t, but I just don’t believe things work that way. My priest has helped me realize that the real miracle here is what’s happened in the last two years. That I am able to accept myself fully. That my wife was able to accept me and forgive me. And that we can continue to be together, building our family, building our future and that of our children.

That is all I ever needed. All I ever wanted. To be known. To be accepted. To be loved. For real. Not the me with the mask, but the me behind the mask. The hurting me. The vulnerable me.

Why Terminology Matters

Terminology Guidelines

Last week, a global inter-agency group released a fairly long document, titled "Terminology Guidelines for the Protection of Children from Sexual Exploitation and Sexual Abuse" (you can find the direct PDF link here). Why does this matter? It matters because there are a wide variety of words that we use to describe a wide variety of topics with regard to the sexual abuse of children, and the sexual exploitation of children. As their document is 114 pages long, this will serve to highlight some of what they say, why they say it, and recommend specific terms based on their recommendations.

A Matter Of Terminology

Some argue that the terminology that we use does not matter. Sexual abuse is sexual abuse, a perpetrator is a perpetrator, and a victim is a victim. However, some terminology can not only minimize what is done to the victim of abuse, and make it seem less harmful than it actually is, it can also perpetuate myths that enable sexual abuse to happen rather than preventing it. In short, the words we use when discussing child sexual abuse and associated crimes matters because we have to be simultaneously respectful both to the victims of such crimes, and to the facts surrounding such crimes. Without giving due respect, we can do more harm than good by the words that we use.

In their introduction, they say, "Greater conceptual clarity on terminology is thus needed to ensure stronger and more consistent advocacy, policy and laws in all languages across all regions of the world. To engender more clarity in the conceptualisation, definition, and translation of sexual exploitation and sexual abuse of children, a multi-stakeholder dialogue involving the voices of a multitude of actors at all levels is needed."

In other words, words matter.

Minor

This term begins on page 8. Minor is generally a term used to describe someone who is under the age of majority, or the age someone becomes an adult. The most common usage is in legal, law enforcement, and similar situations. They recommend using the word "child" in most contexts, and define "child" to mean anyone under the age of 18. Their conclusion? Use "minor" in legal issues, and "child" everywhere else.

Child Prostitute And Child Sex Worker

This term begins on page 31. These terms should be avoided, due to the implication that children in such situations are there by choice, are consenting to their work, and are paid for it. Children who are trafficked or exploited for sexual purposes are not paid, cannot consent, and are not there by choice, they are forced into those situations. Therefore, "child sexual exploitation victims" or "sexual exploitation victims" should be used. These terms are closely related to the next term.

Child Pornography

This term begins on page 35. This, perhaps, is one of the most important terms addressed in the guidelines. Both legally and linguistically, the use of the term "pornography" to refer to images and videos of real children that depict the sexual abuse of children of varying levels is completely misleading. In traditional pornography, there may be some exploitative elements, but the actors are adults who are consenting to act and model for pornographic purposes, and are paid to do so. However, images and videos that depict real children in sexual situations, whether those images involve children on children or adults on children, means that a real child is being sexually abused on film. It involves a real victim, and that real victim can be extremely affected by the knowledge that images of their sexual abuse are on the internet for anyone to see.

In short, such images and videos of real children are sexually exploitative and cannot accurately be described as pornography. Therefore, both the guidelines (p. 35-38) and other researchers have recommended that either "child sexual exploitation material" or "child sexual abuse material" (CSEM/CSAM) should be used to describe such imagery, and the terms "child pornography", "child porn", "kiddy porn", "pedo-porn", or other terms involving the word "pornography" are to be avoided altogether.

Important Note: The imagery I have just described is a completely separate issue from cartoon, computer-generated, or otherwise fictional representations of children involved in sexual situations, and will be addressed separately at some point in the future.

Grooming

This term begins on page 51.Grooming is the process of building trust in a child, the child's community, and breaking down the boundaries that might otherwise hinder someone to be sexual with the child. Grooming can be online or in person, and a significant portion of grooming does take place on social media, though it should be noted that 95% of new sex crimes are committed by first-time offenders, so while it seems to make sense to restrict social media use to sex offenders, the reality is that an adult approaching a minor on social media is, in general, a red flag. According to the guidelines, it is a term that has a generally agreed upon meaning and can be used safely.

About grooming, it should be noted that some grooming is slower is about gaining the victim's trust, but some is also more abrupt and coercive, so as to gain immediate leverage and can take less time than the traditional idea of grooming. It should also be noted that not all grooming behavior is intentional, not all behaviors that appear to be grooming are in fact grooming, and not all behavior that is in fact grooming will appear to be grooming. Some grooming, such as showing pornography or CSEM/CSAM to children, is illegal and is of itself a sex crime, but most grooming does not involve illegal behavior.

Important Note: While there are warning signs to sexually abusive acts, those warning signs do not automatically mean that sexual abuse is the end goal. The presence of warning signs and grooming behavior should warrant further conversation with the person exhibiting the warning signs and grooming behavior, and if necessary, separation from the child involved. The focus in such conversations should be around getting the person in question help and letting them know they have a safe space to be honest, and the conversation should steer clear from accusing the person involved of sexual behavior with children.

Child Sex Tourism

This term begins on page 56. Child sex tourism has traditionally referred to travelling for the specific purpose of sexually exploiting and abusing children, but the term has been increasingly debated. Considerations are the word "tourism", which is a legitimate industry, and "child sex", which amounts to child sexual abuse. In short, the term should be avoided because it has a high potential to normalize the practice of travelling to sexually exploit children.

Pedophiles

This term begins on page 86. They recommend the use of the term "preferential offenders" to describe those who sexually abuse or exploit children because they prefer children sexually, and recommend avoiding the term "pedophiles". They further recommend using the term "situational offenders" to describe those who sexually abuse children without a sexual preference for children.

In short, pedophilia and pedophilic disorder refer to "the clinical diagnosis of a mental health condition". Their note about the condition is:
"According to the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5), paedophilic disorder is a part of a larger group of paraphilic disorders, characterised as a “persistent and intense atypical sexual arousal patterns that are accompanied by clinically significant distress or impairment”. The change in terminology from “paedophilia” or “paedophile” to “paedophilic disorder” in DSM-5 was intended to reflect the growing acceptance among mental health professionals that not all individuals who present with symptoms of paedophilic disorder are perpetrators of child sexual abuse or exploitation."

They further note that, "The terms "paedophile" and "paedophilia" continue to be overused and misunderstood, often seen as a label for a person convicted of child sexual exploitation or sexual abuse rather than as a term for a clinical condition."

I sincerely hope that their recommendations are familiar to you, as I have said much the same thing for quite some time. I have a number of different posts on the subject (here, here, here, and more recently here). Therefore, the fact that a global inter-agency cooperation dedicated to determining the proper terminology is saying the same thing really should catch your attention. It is time for the misuse of the words "pedophile" and "pedophilia" to end.

Wrap-Up

While I did not cover every single term, that does not mean that the other terms mentioned throughout the rest of the guidelines are unimportant. Frankly, trying to whittle down the amount they say about the terms I did include to a few paragraphs was a challenge, as was deciding which terms to include here. While I certainly encourage people to read through all of the guidelines, I recognize that not everyone has the patience to go through a 114-page document describing every single term related to child sexual abuse and child sexual exploitation. I hope you found this breakdown illuminating.

Religious People And Hate Speech

Does This Need An Introduction?

What would you say if your best friend's family was murdered by an angry motorist? Would you say it was too bad the motorist did not kill more drivers? I should hope not. Yet, a similar sentiment was expressed by a "Baptist Pastor", a Mr. Roger Jimenez out of Sacramento, California, who is the "Pastor" of Verity "Baptist Church". Note all of the quotation marks, please, because I hardly believe for one millisecond that the man, or his church, have anything to do with the Jesus Christ I know.

His exact words were, "Hey, are you sad that fifty pedophiles were killed to day? I think that's great. I think that helps society. I think Orlando, Florida's a little safer tonight."

Primary Prevention Advocate

Have you read much of my blog? I hope so. But more importantly, I hope you are aware of the facts I attempt to advocate to counter the myths people believe. You see, pedophilia is the condition of being sexually attracted to children prior to their hitting puberty. Evidence points to this condition being an affliction, not a choice, any more than being bisexual or homosexual is a choice. It is generally accepted fact that people do not choose what or whom they are sexually attracted to. None of what I just said has any bearing whatsoever on the facts surrounding child sexual abuse. Child sexual abuse is perpetrated by a wide variety of people, and while some of them are indeed sexually attracted to children, attempting to define all those who sexually abuse as pedophiles is just as illogical as someone labeling people in the LGBT community as pedophiles.

I Call Bull Excrement

Yes, for those that had no idea, I am a Christian. I am both proud and ashamed to be one. Frankly, it is distracting to the subject of this blog, and I do not talk about it much. Why am I proud? Because I get to know and love God. Why am I ashamed? Because "Pastors" of "Churches" who are supposed to represent Christ are constantly making God look a good sight more awful than He actually is. These people are religious people who hate, not Christians who love God and love others.

That irks me to no end, but what irks me even more are the myths and implications that Mr. Jimenez wrapped up in his barbarically insensitive comment.

I call bull excrement on Mr. Jimenez being a pastor. He is not fit to lead anyone spiritually, particularly himself.

I call bull excrement on the idea pedophiles being a threat to anyone. If a sexual attraction made someone dangerous, we all belong in cages, every single human who is not asexual.

I call bull excrement on the idea that anyone in the LGBT community are any more or less of a threat to sexually abusing children than anyone else is, except maybe recidivist sex offenders.

I call bull excrement on the number of conservative Christians who are applauding and supporting his bigoted comments.

Facts Over Myths Prevent Sexual Abuse

I have reiterated, time and time again, that preventing child sexual abuse before there is a victim is preferable to punishing people after it has already happened. Studies and researchers and politicians and articles have reiterated that point. Yet we are still using erroneous terminology to refer to people who have sexually abused children.

The only context that the words "pedophile" or "pedophiles" belongs in is the context of describing people with the condition of pedophilia, of being sexually attracted to young children. Period. End of sentence. The discussion of that attraction does not belong in the context of child sexual abuse, unless a therapist is discussing the difficulties the condition of pedophilia brings to a client who has sexually abused a child. Period. End of sentence. Sexual attraction to children. Sexual abuse of children. They do not belong in the same sentence, and they are separate.

Can I please get a volunteer to tape this (so as to not deface church property) to the door of Verity Baptist Church?

Primary Prevention Basics

Stop A Moment...

The information that I am about to present will shock you. You will have feelings about it, and I very much doubt that you will like what you are about to read. I doubt you will want to believe it. So please take a moment to relax, and set aside how you feel about the subject of child sexual abuse. Take a moment, and give me the space to present some challenging facts.

The Cold, Hard Truth

Child sexual abuse is an epidemic that we must take steps to reduce. That one-fourth of girls and one-sixth of boys are abused by the time they come of age is pathetic, disturbing, and disgusting. Society has taken many approaches to attempt to curb this epidemic, very similar to the American war on drugs in the 1990's: The main approach is to exact a harsh penalty and hope that the penalty deters people from committing these horrific crimes. The reality that someone can touch the genitals of a child for sexual pleasure is a disgusting, appalling concept just by itself. Then you add to that reality that there are people who are sexually attracted to children the way most adults are attracted to other adults... and you get people getting their pitchforks and nooses ready. People are ready and willing to accept that the people who commit these horrific acts are evil monsters, and that the victims are poor, defenseless children who always tell adults when it happens.

The truth is not nearly as simple as that one paragraph might lead you to believe. Most children do not disclose that they were touched in a private place by anyone, because of the fear, shame, and humiliation that accompanies such a basic boundary violation. And when they do tell an adult, the reaction is typically something like, "But we know and trust that person. Only monsters molest children, and they're not a monster." Most adults who sexually abuse children are not actually attracted to them, but are heterosexual. And most juveniles (a third of sexual abusers are juveniles at the time of the crime) who sexually abuse children are doing so because of abuse they have suffered, which is a stark contrast to the majority of abusers who were never sexually abused as children. The truth is that child sexual abuse is not a simple problem to solve, and even handling a disclosure of abuse can be very, very difficult.

Extremely Controversial

Primary prevention is an extremely controversial area of sexual abuse prevention. Primary prevention involves facts people do not want to believe, and there are many extremely difficult truths to accept, if one is to look at all into what it means to prevent child sexual abuse before it occurs. Some of them are:

1. Pedophilia, the attraction to children, is separate from the act of sexually abusing a child.
2. Those who sexually abuse children cannot be profiled, and there is no one common factor that motivates the abuse.
3. Those who sexually abuse children do not typically repeat their crimes.
4. Sex offender registration and community notification laws do not prevent children from being abused, and researchers have found extremely limited, if not counterintuitive results from the enaction of such laws.
5. Victims of child sexual abuse do not disclose the abuse for months or years, if at all.
6. Mandatory reporting also prevents people who are concerned about their thoughts from seeking out a psychologist for fear of being reported to the police and having their lives ruined.

These truths are controversial in part because the media has butchered the language in stories describing those who sexually abuse. They typically refer to those who abuse as pedophiles, or paedophiles, and their crimes as pedophilia. Pedophiles and sex abusers; pedophilia and child sexual abuse: These terms are used interchangeably, even though they mean very different things to researchers and those who work with these subjects. That difference is probably the biggest hurdle to overcome, because it seems to make sense that the sexual abuse of a child would be motivated by a sexual attraction to them. If you can accept just the first fact as truth, it will become easier to believe the rest. 

Popular Myths, Stigma, And Hype... And Reality

The reality of child sexual abuse is not at all a simple subject. I have seen myths perpetrated by people who are very much against sexual abuse. This weekend, in fact, I was told that, "The subject is as simple as no matter what urges you get you DO NOT HARM AN INNOCENT!!! End of [story]..." when I told someone that the subject of child sexual abuse prevention is not simple at all, due to a myriad of controversial laws that do more harm than good, due to the complexities of what motivate someone to sexually abuse a child, and due to the oversimplifying of the issue by the media and by politicians.

Most people think that not abusing a child is as simple as knowing the difference between right and wrong, or that abusing a child is always perpetrated by adults who are sexual predators and monsters. But the reality is that those who abuse a child... are us. They are human. One-third of them are juveniles, not adults. Over 90% of sexual abusers are known and trusted by the victim and the victim's family. Most sexual abusers do not have a psychological drive to molest children, the child was just an available outlet for a powerful emotion that distorted the person's thinking and decisions, similar to the way someone desperate enough can commit murder under the influence of powerful emotions like rage, jealousy, or fear. As such, the motivations that lead to an abuser's decision to sexually abuse a child are complex to foresee, treat, or prevent, let alone be believed by the general public.

Accusations Against Researchers, Therapists, And Advocates

If I had a dime for every time I have been accused of being a sex offender just for pointing out facts and statistics about sex offenders, I would have plenty of money. This is a very common accusation against anyone who delves very deeply into the realm of preventing child sexual abuse: That we are coddling sexual offenders, sexual abusers, and child molesters. Or worse, that we are child molesters who just want to make the act acceptable. I have even been called creepy. The amount of this same pathetic logic leveled at researchers, advocates, and therapists is astounding to me. Here we are, attempting to educate people about the subject, but we are constantly being accused of coddling abusers or worse. Who are some of these experts?

I would like to showcase two researchers: James Cantor, and Elizabeth Letourneau:

Dr. Letourneau is the current director of the Moore Center for the Prevention of Child Sexual Abuse, and the former president of the Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers. Her work is primarily in researching ways that sexual abuse can be prevented, studying and working with those who have committed sexual crimes, and helping form public policy so that these crimes can be prevented. She posts frequently on Twitter, but is rarely liked or retweeted, except by a handful of colleagues and advocates like myself.

Dr. Cantor is a Canadian sex researcher that studies sexual disorders, known as paraphilias, for a living. He gets paid to figure out why people are sexually attracted to what they are sexually attracted to. He has authored many research studies, spoken and written for many news organizations, and done a lot to prevent child sexual abuse. He simply wants people to know and understand his subject matter. Yet, I have seen him accused of attacking abuse victims, being arrogant, and other petty insults.

The public response to these experts is frightening, and by reading many of these responses you would think that the public are the experts, and these people are just hacks who make stuff up for their own amusement. But as you can see by their profiles and their work, they have dedicated their entire lives to contributing to a solution to the epidemic of child sexual abuse.

Tying It All Together

You may not realize it, but your opinion matters. What you know and what you think you know about the subject of child sexual abuse has a very real impact to the epidemic of child sexual abuse. If what you think you know are actually myths, stereotypes, and misinformation about the subject, then you can actually contribute to the epidemic rather than its solutions. The truths of child sexual abuse, and the facts in the realm of primary prevention are indeed counterintuitive. However, believing the myths and misinformation over the facts on the issue means that we can blind ourselves to the reality that our neighbor, our friend, our family member, or our own children could be struggling with an issue that could, or already has, led to a child being abused. Believing the myths and misinformation mean that we deny the truth, and even attempt to cover it up.

The biggest reason that children do not disclose their own sexual abuse is to protect their abuser, and to protect their loved ones from the knowledge that they are being sexually abused. Adults do not disclose abuse for very similar reasons: They do not want the atrocious decision to haunt the abuser for the rest of their lives, and they know that will happen with the laws we have formed and the public opinion on these issues. That is one of the reasons why navigating a disclosure of abuse is so complex. Our knee-jerk reactions may be to just tell the police, but the reality when it happens is not nearly that simple for most people.

When this topic comes up, please take a deep breath, in, and out. Please take a moment to center yourself, and think rationally. Take a moment to realize that your reactions are not only normal, they are expected. But also take a moment to realize that it is emotional reactions that can contribute to the epidemic of child sexual abuse rather than contributing to a solution to that epidemic. We have already formed policies and laws based on the passionate reactions to this issue, and research has shown many times that these policies are not doing what they intended to do, and they can even increase crime. It may sound like it makes sense to try to keep sex offenders away from schools and parks, or to put them on a list, or do any number of other endless punishments.

However, these methods are only effective once a sex crime has already happened.

Criminology Myths Debunked

Today, I ran across a rather unfortunate article discussing the prevention of child sexual abuse. While a very small amount of the information in the article is accurate, the majority of it is not. This will serve as a review of the information presented in the article, as well as a rally cry to protect our children. Not with myths, not with misinformation, but with facts.

Part One: What Is Pedophilia? Who Are Pedophiles?

This article is wrong from the very first sentence, which has to be some kind of achievement somewhere. Obviously, anyone with internet access (and the ability to read English) can look on the side of this blog and click the "Wiki: Pedophilia" link on the side, and read that pedophilia refers to an attraction to children that meets very specific criteria. You can also see my recent post on pedophilia. Why does this matter? Well, the title of the article is not "Pedophilia From The Perspective Of Criminology", but "Do more to prevent child sexual abuse". Sexual abuse is a choice. Our best information from the DSM-V is that pedophilia is not a choice. It is described as a sexual orientation:

Page 698 of the DSM-V, first paragraph

Obviously, pedophilia cannot be both a condition and a crime. It cannot be a noun and a verb at the same time. That is a logical fallacy of ambiguity called equivocation: Using the same word to mean multiple things so as to make a fallacious argument sound solid. A student of critical thinking could easily see where I am going with this. The article is supposedly written by a criminologist who studied at the University of Detroit in 1989 for a masters in criminal justice. If someone who is smart enough to get a masters and direct a university in Malaysia, but cannot do a simple Wikipedia search to use words properly, I question his credentials and his ability to lead properly in preventing child sexual abuse.

So far, that covers just the first sentence. The second paragraph is equally poor. Pedophiles are not people whom prefer to have sex with children, they are people who find children who have not yet hit puberty attractive. Many pedophiles would prefer not to have such a sexual attraction at all. Where this man gets the idea that he somehow knows how all people with the condition of pedophilia think, I have no clue, but I very much doubt that they teach mind-reading in the criminal justice master's programs in Detroit. And as far as I know, pedophiles do not prefer to taste children, nor do they achieve sexual pleasure from children. That would imply that all pedophiles sexually abuse children, and given that around a third of those who abuse children are pedophiles, well, that implication would not hold true under any expert's analysis.

Also, the DSM-V discusses pedophiles as exclusive (only attracted to children) or non-exclusive (attracted to children, but also to other age groups). So the last sentence, that they desire sexual relations only with children, is demonstrably false.

Part Two: Grooming, Profiling, And Abuse Facts

Some of the information here is okay, like the last sentence: A well-known abuse statistic is that 90% of sexual abuse victims know and trust their abuser, though I am not sure how exactly the victims' mothers factor into that well-known statistic. The point is that people generally trust those who abuse children. Pedophiles do in fact come from all backgrounds, and pedophiles only share one thing in common: An attraction to prepubescent children. There is no way to identify a pedophile. Nor, by the way, is there any way to identify someone who sexually abuses children, short of catching them in the act or the child disclosing the abuse, which was probably his point: There is no profile of someone who sexually abuses a child.

However, we do know why people abuse children. They abuse children because they are available, because of unmanaged mental health needs, out of mishandling difficult emotions, and yes, sometimes being sexually attracted is a factor. However, the sexual attraction is not the reason they abused, but the fact that they did not properly manage or get support for the attraction that they have. They abused a child because they made the decision to do so. The main point here is that sexual abuse is a choice, and pedophilia is not.

Huckle made decisions to seek out children, and to write a manual on how people can sexually abuse children and get away with it. You have likely seen news articles referring to Huckle as a pedophile who wrote a pedophilia manual. He is a sexual abuser who wrote a sexual abuse manual. Pedophilia had little to do with his choices. I also very much doubt that Western privelege factored much into his decision to abuse children, as there are many people with Western privelege that use it to help people rather than exploit children. You might as well mention that he had a beard, therefore all people who have beards might sexually abuse children.

He alludes to grooming in the first sentence by saying that abuse "can be a small act in everyday life". I say he alluded to it, because he does not actually name it as grooming, or go into detail about what grooming is. Grooming is the intentional or unintentional progression of earning the victim and the trust of those close to the victim so that the perpetrator can spend time with the victim alone without arousing suspicion. Grooming is a real thing, though grooming is not, of itself, abuse. Nor, I might add, is abuse a "small act in everyday life". This man is a professional at minimizing child sexual abuse, as abuse is neither a small act, nor should it ever be part of everyday life for a child.

Part Three: Criminal Behavior, Pedophilia, And Victims

The theory mentioned in the first sentence may have been a popular notion in 1989, but I very much doubt that you will find many criminologists (no, that is not my field) that believe that all criminal behavior is learned from other criminals who hold criminal attitudes and values. You might as well say that all crime is the result of mafias, we just have to identify who taught whom. I have no idea what most criminologists actually believe in regards to theories and what causes behavior, but I am very familiar with psychology and psychologists. Most experts in sex crime that I have either spoken with or read a peer-reviewed study from would say that child sexual abuse is a choice. That choice may be influenced by environmental factors, or by biological factors, but it does not negate the fact that behavior is the end result of a decision. It is controllable. This is yet another example of the man minimizing child sexual abuse.

And again, he uses the term "pedophiles" to refer to those who have abused children. The number of abusers who were abused themselves is around 30-40%, last I checked that statistic. You can look it up if you do not believe me, but 30-40% hardly qualifies as "most pedophiles", or rather, most abusers. And while pedophilia is certainly the result of some complex biological and environmental process, the condition of being sexually attracted to young children does not automatically lead to criminal behavior any more than depression automatically leads to suicide. This man is clearly speaking outside his area of expertise, and is attempting to blame mental illnesses and psychological conditions as the cause of criminal behavior. Can I get a show of hands for those who think that such blame casting towards mentally ill people is completely inappropriate?

Part Four: What Makes Someone A Pedophile, Cure For Pedophilia

While I did not look up the 2014 Korean report on twins with pedophilia (I hesitate to believe it even exists, after what I have read so far), I am quite familiar with James Cantor's work on pedophilia and what he says about the subject: That pedophilia acts as a sexual orientation and is developed very, very early and is likely the result of biological processes far more than it is the result of an environmental factor such as child sexual abuse. None of that, of course, is at all relevant to child sexual abuse and how it could be prevented, unless he were asserting that pedophiles do not choose their condition and should receive help and not stigma (this is obviously not his argument).

He claims there is no agreement about what makes an individual a pedophile. This is almost laughable. Pedophilia is a word that describes the condition of having an ongoing sexual attraction to prepubescent children, so obviously people who have such an ongoing sexual attraction would be a pedophile. While there is certainly disagreement over the nuances of pedophilia and how pedophiles should be treated, there is no academic disagreement about what makes someone a pedophile to my knowledge. It is a narrow term with a narrow definition, and the term itself does not have disagreement, the concepts surrounding it do. Should it be called a disorder? Should it be called an orientation? What about mandatory reporting? These concepts rage ongoing debates.

And it is absolutely correct that there is no cure for having the sexual orientation of pedophilia, it is absolutely incorrect that most pedophiles are sociopaths. I believe I discussed this recently. He is referring, of course, to sexual predators who are the very extreme minority of sexual abusers, which again, is completely irrelevant to pedophilia or pedophiles. While there is some comorbidity (like correlation, but for psychologists) between pedophilia and antisocial personality disorder (psychopathy, or sociopathy, if you prefer the stigmatized language), there is also comorbidity between pedophilia and substance use disorders, depressive, bipolar, and anxiety disorders, as well as other paraphilic disorders. Yes, I copied that almost word-for-word from page 700 of the DSM-5.

Conveniently ignoring the reality of pedophilic disorder to make his point that pedophiles are terrible people that have an innate drive to rape children is academically dishonest. Yet, this man is the director of a university as well as holding several affiliations and titles. He should stick to his areas of expertise and not butcher the field of psychology and pass it off as fact.

The last sentence is almost laughable. Do I even need to cite sources when I say that sexual recidivism of sexual offenders is around 10-20%? Do I need to link the two studies on the side of this page, which will tell you that sexual abusers have lower recidivism than the average sexual offender? Anyone can search "recidivism for child sexual abusers" and see the top result. The last sentence is a lie that is clearly exposed to be a lie by a simple Google search. If he had a masters degree in criminal justice, he should be able to find that information far easier than I can.

Part Five: How Abuse Happens, How Sexual Abuse Can End

Here, he begins wading into realms far outside my area of experience. What I can tell you is that law enforcement must have specific training in how to question victims of child sexual abuse so that the trauma involved is not made worse by making the victim relive the experience before they are ready. I can also tell you that law enforcement must spread far and wide the message that there is no profile for sexual abusers. I can even tell you that enforcement is a must. I also wholeheartedly agree that effective laws are a must in combating child sexual abuse. However, speaking from the perspective of an American, with all of our sex offender registration and notification laws, and all of the subsequent studies that have shown how useless they are except in maybe 5% of sexual offenders, I must say that these laws must be done with expert analysis and recommendations. Which brings me to the final part of Mr. Satar's article...

Part Six: Sexual Abuse Prevention, Responsibility, And Child Protection

I completely agree with the first two paragraphs: Preventing child sexual abuse is everyone's responsibility. The police must investigate and enforce, but parents, teachers, and others must be able to spot abuse when it is occurring, and spot the warning signs in those who may be at-risk to sexually abuse a child. The third paragraph is also brilliant: Parents must ensure the safety of their children. The fourth paragraph is golden: Parents must know the warning signs and not take someone's title for granted (oh, the irony). We must not assume that someone is reliable because they are trusted in the community, or because of a title. We must watch for the warning signs.

But that is where I stop agreeing, because the last two paragraphs scream the same precursor warning signs that America should have been hearing in the 1990's when parents began demanding laws that we now know are completely ineffective at protecting children: Put registries in place, register pedophiles and child abusers (conflating pedophilia with abuse again, I see), and do all this to protect our children! That has not worked well in the United States, and that rhetoric was formed on the assumption that recidivism is high, but that is just an erroneous assumption.

Mr. Satar, our children do need to be protected from child sexual abuse. But they do not need to be protected from pedophiles or pedophilia. They need to be protected from the bad decisions of older children and adults, and those are just that: Decisions. Our children, not just here in America, not just in Malaysia, but all of the children in the world, must be protected by facts, laws and policies that are based on those facts. America and Europe has already made the mistake of forming these policies and laws based on the emotive rally cry: Protect our children! It is time that this rally cry becomes based in fact, not just hype, so that it can be effective at actually keeping our children safe.

The first part of that, if you noticed, is fact. Verifiable, trustworthy, peer-reviewed, honest, fact. Not myths based on a misunderstanding of psychology, sexual abusers, and the dehumanization of those that abuse children. Fact.