News Outlets That Conflate Sexual Abuse And Sexual Attraction

Why Is This An Issue?

As you have heard me illustrate many times, terminology matters to preventing child sexual abuse. Using "sex offender" instead of "sexual abuser" gives the impression that those who abuse have been caught before, that the biggest risk is from recidivists. However, the reality indicates the opposite: First-time offenders are the biggest risks. In other words, improper terminology spreads myths about child sexual abuse, and myths enable sexual abuse to happen.

Likewise, confusing the sexual attraction to children (similar to heterosexual attraction, but directed towards children in some form) and the horrific sexual abuse of a child gives the wrong impression that child sexual abuse is perpetrated out of sexual pleasure.

It also gives the wrong impression that those with a sexual attraction are a risk, where the facts and logic say otherwise. It places an unfair stigma on a group of people, through no fault of their own, have a sexual attraction to children. This can, in turn, increase child sexual abuse by driving people into corners where poor decisions and mental illness thrive. The results of confusing pedophilia and child sexual abuse, or pedophiles and child rapists, make child sexual abuse harder to prevent.

Minimizing Child Sexual Abuse

As you have heard me say many times, confusing these terms minimizes child sexual abuse. Why is that? Well, it is like referring to stealing as kleptomania, or a brutal murder on a highway as road rage: It is referring to a horrific act as if it is the result of a feeling, rather than as a conscious choice to harm a child, and that sends an unacceptable message.

Stigmatizing Sexuality

Confusing sexual abuse with a sexual attraction to children also places an unfair and frankly slanderous label on those who have never hurt a child in their life. When people use the word "pedophile", it should only be to mean someone with an attraction to children. Otherwise, it places the label of child rapist on those who, according to estimates and statistics, do not rape children. It is just as serious as posting on Facebook that someone is a child rapist: If they are not, it can land the accuser in hot legal water very quickly.

News Outlet List

I think it is high time for a list, given the amount of articles from specific major news sources that confuse terminology around child sexual abuse. This list is current as of June 17, 2017, and was formed through many weeks of viewing news reports with specific keywords flagged: Pedophile and pedophilia. Many more minimize the issue by referring to child sexual exploitation material or sexual abuse images as "child pornography," as if the images are legitimate pornography where the child can consent, is paid, and is actually acting.

Note To Media:
If you would like your organization removed from this list, then please use the contact widget on the right-hand side of this page to request it. Please be aware that you will need to demonstrate at least three months of organization-wide content that refrains from minimizing child sexual abuse by conflating it with a sexual attraction to children and calls sexual abuse and sexual abusers by proper terms. Absent this content, your request will be denied.

• Associated Press
• Many times, other news organizations will borrow reports from the Associated Press, so they may not come up directly as "Associated Press" in a news feed, you have to actually read the article.
• The Australian
• RT
• New York Post
• The Sun
• Daily Mail
• CNN
• The Daily Caller
• The Barrie Examiner
• The News Tribune
• The Times Of Israel
• Israel News Nation
• CNBC
• Collective Evolution
• The Star Tribune

Why The Statistic Matters: Part One, Pedophilia

All the time, you hear statistics about a great number of things. You see them frequently here, on the blog. But you do not often see the practical application of them, and it is up to you to figure out the point of the statistic in question. Some are obvious, while others are not nearly as obvious.

Because of that, I will do a miniseries on why the statistics cited on this site should matter to you, not only in your everyday life, but why they matter to preventing child sexual abuse.

Statistic 1: Population Of Pedophiles

Current statistics (the DSM-V (the psychiatry Bible) and Michael Seto) put the population of those with pedophilic disorder as mainly being male: 3-5% of adolescent and adult males. This is, of course, an estimate. However, it is telling because pedophilic disorder is not the same thing as pedophilia: The DSM-V differentiates the two. This means that the high estimate of 3-5% of males means that even more have a sexual attraction to children. Why? Because pedophilic disorder is a very specific mental condition in which those with pedophilia, a sexual attraction to prepubescent children, have difficulties like depression, anxiety, and difficulty relating to others. It does not cover those with an attraction to teenagers, which means that the true population figure for those with attractions to children broadly is actually higher than 3-5% of males. That is about to matter even more because of statistic number two...

Statistic 2: Proportion Of Those Who Sexually Abused Children Who Have Pedophilia

The second statistic is well-known by researchers and therapists working with forensic and non-forensic populations of pedophiles: One-third of those who sexually abused children have pedophilia. Yes, one-third. This tells us a great deal of information about child sexual abuse: Mainly, that it is not about getting sexual pleasure from a child. You see, if the population of those with pedophilic disorder is an estimate and a low one, but the proportion of abusers with pedophilia is proportionately higher than that estimate (6-15 times higher). This means there is something associated with the attraction that drives the motivating factors that fuel the decision to abuse a child.

Statistic 3: Most Who Have Pedophilic Disorder Do Not Abuse Children

If you were to read through the section on pedophilic disorder in the DSM-V, you see a rather bleak picture of a person tortured by their attractions to children. When you get to the differential diagnosis section, you see that pedophilic disorder can correlate to alcohol and substance abuse, obsessive-compulsive disorder, and even antisocial personality disorder. When you get to comorbidity, you see that pedophilic disorder is correlated to depression, bipolar, and anxiety disorders... while they also note that these observations are only among forensic populations of those with pedophilic disorder, meaning that more study is needed in this area.

You have heard me state on this blog before: Given our best estimates without trying to compensate for underreporting, 3-5.2% of pedophiles molest children, and after accounting for that, 4.8-9.36% molest children. In other words, our best guess is that 90.64-97% of pedophiles do not molest children. This is obviously significant, because it means that a sexual attraction to children does not appear to frequently correlate with sexual abuse. It also means that what I just outlined from the DSM-V about the bleak lives of someone with a sexual attraction to children... only comes from looking at 3-10% of those with such an attraction. In other words, a lot of our information is missing about pedophilia, sexual attraction to children in general, and most importantly, it is not reasonable to correlate pedophiles with child molestation. It means that a sexual attraction to children is more common than child sexual abuse. This is frankly huge, not only for those who study pedophiles and pedophilia, but also for child sexual abuse prevention.

Statistic 4: Those Viewing Sexual Abuse Images More Often Have Pedophilia...

To be precise, 61% of those convicted of possessing child sexual exploitation material have pedophilia. What this means is that pedophiles are trying to satisfy their sexual needs with sexual material of children. This begs the question, given recent discussion around art, virtual reality, and 3-D images involving children, of whether researchers are wrong to assume that such virtual imagery serves as a gateway for a hands-on offense involving a child. If more pedophiles view sexual imagery involving real children, could that number be reduced if virtual imagery involving children were more available, and legal? Could this virtual imagery be not only a better outlet than imagery involving real children, but reduce the number of sexual abuse cases? More study is clearly needed in this area to test correlation.

Enough Statistics: What Is The Point?

The point to overviewing just these three statistics and why they matter is not merely an academic exercise: It has real implications for preventing child sexual abuse. It suggests that stigmatizing a sexual attraction to children and viewing it as a risk factor for sexually harming children is not going to be helpful to preventing child sexual abuse, because a sexual attraction to children is less often a risk factor for a hands-on sexual abuse case and more often a risk factor for viewing sexual abuse images. While viewing images of children being sexually abused is indeed harmful to the children involved, the creation of virtual images is not because real children are not involved.

These statistics also very clearly indicate that we have barely scratched the surface of knowing pedophilia and sexual attraction to children: It means more study is sorely needed in a variety of ways to uncover that knowledge. It means we should look at what happens when you give those with a sexual attraction to children support instead of an automatic and clearly incorrect label of child molester, as Prevention Project Dunkelfeld is doing in Germany. It is obvious to anyone working in these areas... they need money to do this research, and the number of people willing to put money towards this research is limited.

Bottom Line

Conflating a sexual attraction to children, which we barely know much about, with the sexual abuse of a child spreads incorrect myths that hamper our ability to prevent sexual abuse and interfere with the ability of those with an attraction to children to seek support and seek peers who face the same attraction. Mixing up the sexual attraction to children, with the sexual abuse of a child, is unwarranted, inaccurate, and only serves to enable child sexual abuse by driving both issues further into darkness and secrecy, where sexual abuse thrives.

New York Post Article About Pedophiles

So, last week, I had an article from a columnist in the New York Post come up in my news feed. I usually dismiss stuff from the New York Post, because it is usually difficult to get in contact with their authors to notify them that pedophilia and child sexual abuse, as well as pedophiles and child rapists, are four separate and distinct ideas. I do this outreach, because conflating the two minimizes child sexual abuse and unfairly stigmatizes pedophilia.

This blog has covered this distinction and why it matters several times, most recently when I was talking about Prevention Project Dunkelfeld. So, I had a brief correspondence with the writer of the article, John Crudele, about why the distinction matters, why child pornography is incorrectly named, and that the distinction can mean less children are sexually abused. The ideas I am presenting are hardly new. They have been covered in the news, by researchers, and by non-offending pedophiles themselves. Even This American Life has tackled this issue.

You can read the full text of what I wrote him (minus the links, sadly). Unfortunately, Mr. Crudele did not completely represent the bulk of the exchange in what he published, but as you can see, I did not ask him to publish it.

I especially enjoyed his threat to report me to the FBI, when I have reached out many times to legislators in Minnesota and law enforcement agencies about the facts around sex offenders, a prosecutor's office out of Long Island about not blaming victims for abuse, and yesterday, the Minnesota Department of Corrections regarding Prevention Project Dunkelfeld. I could be wrong, but I doubt anyone in law enforcement has a big issue with the advocacy that I am doing to prevent child sexual abuse before it can happen.

But there you have it, I was in the New York Post. And Mr. Crudele, if you are paying any attention to this blog post, you may want to better inform yourself about these issues. Myths do not protect children from being sexually abused and exploited, facts do, and the more myths we believe about child sexual abuse and drive it into secrecy, the more we enable child sexual abuse. I think a better situation is where children are not victimized, and pedophiles are not scarred by the idea that they are a ticking time bomb waiting to molest children. We must talk about this if we are to end abuse.

But thank you, Mr. Crudele, for presenting your readers with the ideas that I emailed you about. The more we talk about these issues, the better.

Why "Pedophile" vs. "Child Rapist" Matters To Prevention

This Again?

Apparently I need to cover this again more clearly, since my words can apparently be twisted beyond all recognition. So, yes, I am covering this topic yet one more time in the hopes that I can communicate more clearly what I intend to say about why pedophilia/pedophiles are different from child sex abuse/child rapists.

Most Child Rape Has Nothing To Do With Sex

That is where we will start: Child rape is usually not something that happens because someone wants the sexual pleasure of doing things with children. It is usually more related to power, control, or unmet mental health needs. The unmet mental health needs can range from anything to someone with lots of stress in their life, and the child is an available outlet for that stress to someone who cannot find an appropriate adult sexual partner, and again the child is an available outlet for that unmet need. Even in cases where the child rapist does have an ongoing sex drive towards children, the sex drive is less of an issue than other factors like desperation, depression, anxiety, or feeling in control.

This part is vastly oversimplified due to the fact that motivations behind child sexual abuse are vast and complex enough to fill multiple books. But the overarching point is that an ongoing sex drive towards children is usually unrelated to the motivations behind why someone sexually abuses a child.

That is important because...

...Those With A Sex Drive Towards Children Do Not Usually Rape Children

That may be difficult to believe, but it is true. Those with a sex drive towards children are not usually responsible for raping them. However, a statistically significant (30% or so) portion of sexual abuse does include a sex drive towards children as a factor, which means that something more could be done for these people to manage the issues (like desperation, depression, anxiety, and feeling out-of-control) that can arise from having a sex drive directed at children.

In other words, we need to make sure that those with this sex drive towards children have some way of getting help if they feel they need it- before they feel desperate, depressed, anxious, or out-of-control and are then at-risk for sexually abusing a child. Making help more readily available to someone with a sex drive towards kids means less kids are abused.

...Which Does Not Mean That...

• Child rape is okay
• We should accept pedophiles being sexual with children
• Pedophilia should be normalized (whatever the heck that even means, I have no idea)
• Pedophiles get a free pass to molest children

None of those four bullet points is the point, in any way shape or form. The point is that child rape is bad, and needs to be avoided, and one of the ways we can do that is by making sure that someone who feels sexually inclined towards children has whatever help they feel they might need in facing that sexual inclination. The point to them getting that help is so that they do not rape a child.

Primary Prevention Primer

Maybe I just like words that start with P, and maybe I think people sometimes do not understand how primary prevention differs from, well, prevention. But primary prevention is about stopping child sexual abuse, before it can happen. It means a child is not abused in the first place, as opposed to punishing the living snot out of whoever rapes a child (because at that point, the rape has already happened). Why "as opposed to punishing"? That is somewhat difficult to answer because...

...Mandatory Reporting Hurts Kids

It hurts children by making it less likely that adults who know sexual abuse has happened will report it or direct the child rapist to a therapist because they know that therapist will turn the rapist into the police. Also, it makes children less likely to say that they were abused, because they fear that the rapist (which is usually someone they know, love, and trust) will get in trouble, and because they want to protect the community from the knowledge that this great person that people love and trust is doing these horrid things.

When a mother does not take her teenage kid to a therapist for fear of the therapist calling the police because the teenage kid sexually abused a younger kid, that is a prevention failure. Not only will the teenage kid not be held accountable, they will not be likely to understand why they did that and are at-risk for abusing more children. If our system is set up to punish the snot out of those who rape kids, no matter who they are, it means less rapists are held accountable, less rapists get the mental health help that they need, and it means that rape happens more (which is bad (obviously)).

The Bowtie

A child rapist is someone who has made a choice to hurt a child (regardless of how the rapist justified it or what their motivations were, the behavior to rape a child is a choice). A pedophile is someone who has an ongoing sex drive directed at kids (and has likely never harmed a child). If child sexual abuse is to be prevented, and pedophiles are to get whatever help they feel they need (so that a child is not raped), then we need to keep these terms separate. Thus ends my rant against improper terminology, and my frustration with my apparent inability to communicate clearly what I mean when I say that, "We should pity pedophiles because they have an attraction they cannot help." The part to be pitied is that pedophiles have a sexual attraction to kids that they did not ask for and cannot change, and they can never act on it the way you, I, or most other human beings can be sexual with someone because the someone we are attracted to is old enough to consent to being sexual. That deserves pity, and whatever help they ask for. It does not deserve a correlation with being a child rapist. If someone has not raped a child, they should not be automatically confused with someone who has, regardless of their sexuality.

Issues In Mandatory Reporting

Introduction

Mandatory reporting can be an immensely complex topic to cover. Given the pushes in the United Kingdom for mandatory reporting, I think it is necessary to address some of the failures that mandatory reporting can have, as well as some of the misconceptions of what mandatory reporting calls for. I think that in the United Kingdom, there are particular concerns about whistleblowers who may wish to report what they know to be an abusive situation, but fear that their job may be on the line. This is a separate issue from mandatory reporting. So, this post will aim to address the difference between mandatory reporting and whistleblower protection, and the pitfalls of mandatory reporting.

Issues In Mandatory Reporting

One of the biggest issues that comes to mind with mandatory reporting is the reality of who sexually abuses children, or for that matter, the reality of who abuses children in general. The public perception seems to continue to be that dirty strangers and sex offenders abuse children, or sexually abuse children. However, the reality is that over 90% of those who sexually abuse children are people known and trusted by both the child and the community around the child. With sexual assault as a whole, that statistic is still above 80%. In other words, in the majority of these cases the perpetrator is someone who is known, trusted, and well-liked in the community of the child.

When you love someone, the last thing you want for them are the legal hassles of being arrested, charged, or convicted of a crime. You can tell yourself until you are blue in the face that it does not matter who the person is, if they are sexually abusing your child, you will report them immediately. I really do not care what you tell yourself, but the reality is not at all that simple. Say you are married with children, and you find out that your husband or wife is sexually abusing one of the children. You want them and the child, first and foremost, to get mental health help to wade through the issue and ensure it does not happen again.

Another common public perception is that most of the time someone does sexually assault or abuse someone, they will inevitably reoffend. Please stop here. Go to the right-hand side of this blog, and at the top you will find, “Resources:Studies And Articles”. Click it. You can pick any number of studies and articles in this resource, but the facts and statistics firmly establish the fact that most people who sexually take advantage of someone else will not do so again. The facts also show that help is effective in dropping the number of people who re-offend. While recidivism rates are far from perfect, they are a great general indicator of how likely to re-offend a particular criminal population is.

So, let us visit a few scenarios:

1.      A single parent who discovers that a teenage son or daughter is sexually abusing a younger sibling.

2.      A married couple with children, and one of the couple discovers that the other is sexually abusing the children.

3.      A married couple without children, and one of the couple discovers that the other is volunteering with children, and takes individual children to private places for unknown reasons. They suspect something might be going on.

4.      Someone who has sexual attractions to children, and fears they might someday act upon their attractions.

5.      Someone who has sexually abused a child and wants to get help to stop and make sure it does not happen again.

In each of these scenarios, which are likely very common, you have people who, under mandatory reporting laws, would not be mandated to report the abuse. However, if any of these people see a therapist, that therapist would be required, under mandatory reporting, to tell law enforcement about that situation. All of these people are either very close to the abusive person (1-3), or they are the abusive person (4-5). If they are aware that seeing a therapist means the involvement of law enforcement, how likely are they to seek help?

That just covers five scenarios not involving mandatory reporters. Now, let us take a glance at some situations that could involve mandatory reporters, under mandatory reporting laws:

1.      A social worker, teacher, or church official that becomes aware of abuse within the child’s family.

2.      A social worker, teacher, or church official that becomes aware that a coworker is abusing a child.

3.      A police officer that becomes aware that their partner or boss is abusing a child.

4.      A doctor or nurse that becomes aware that their direct supervisor is abusing a child.

5.      Someone who works in any one profession that requires mandatory reporting, but knows someone in their personal life who is abusing a child.

Suddenly, mandatory reporting stops being straightforward. Does the person in the first scenario do their duty and rip apart the child’s family, which is also traumatic for a child? Does the person in situations 2-4 shatter their workplace with such a revelation? If their country does not have whistleblower protection laws, which shield someone in those situations from losing their job, will they be risking their job? How likely are any of these people to say anything in the absence of mandatory reporting laws? How likely is it that, under mandatory reporting laws, these people will be making a difficult situation even more traumatic, not only for the child, but all of the people around them?

Mandatory reporting may sound like the right thing to do at first, but these ten situations raise a number of questions that do not have solid answers. Countries that have mandatory reporting, like the United States and Canada, sometimes will have procedures in place for law enforcement to limit the trauma of involving the police. These procedures are not in place in every situation, and come places will have child protective services, family court, or a similar setup to ensure that fairness and justice are both in place. Child advocates, lawyers, judges, juries, therapists, social workers… the complications to each of these situations are not as simple as “make them report it to police”.

Whistleblower Laws

Some countries, like the United States, have what are called “whistleblower” laws to protect people who know of illegal activity within the company from facing retaliation for reporting the illegal activity to the police. These whistleblower laws do not mandate that people report such activity, but they do give them legal protections and courses of action to take if their employer retaliates against them if they choose to make such a report. These laws give added protection and are aimed at limiting the actions that employers can take in response to such a report being filed.

Pedophiles

I must stop a moment to address something that most people do not consider, and that is the reality that pedophiles do not always abuse children. A pedophile is someone with sexual attractions to young children, and there is academic evidence to suggest that not all pedophiles are even a danger to children. Observing that reality does not make me some kind of “sex offender advocate”, or mean that I am “taking the side of sex offenders”. It means I recognize a fact that is related to the issue of child sexual abuse. I have discussedthe estimates that can be made based on what we know about these issues, and these estimates show that using the most conservative estimate of the number of pedophiles, only 8% or less are known to sexually abuse children.

With that being said, and as you probably realize with me having to dedicate an entire paragraph to explain it, pedophilia is an extremely stigmatized condition. If you wish to know more about this stigma, please copy “stigma against pedophiles” into Google, as it is not the main focus here.

However, it should be pointed out that most mental health providers do not have specific experience with pedophilia or other sexual issues. There have also been many horror stories of pedophiles being reported to the police merely for talking with a therapist about their attractions in order to get help with them. Therefore, the common assumption among pedophiles is that if their country has mandatory reporting, it is not safe to talk with a therapist about the issues they are experiencing. Sexual abusers who are sexually attracted to children (“pedophilic”, in other words) make up about a third of sexual abusers. Imagine if even half of those people felt they were able to get professional help, before they had sexually abused a child.

Conclusion

Mandatory reporting is not an ideal solution to child sexual abuse. It can cause more issues than it solves by pushing people further away from mental health help, and it can have the added effect of stigmatizing mental health issues. Other solutions besides mandatory reporting, like whistleblower laws, should be considered in the UK instead, and a closer look must be paid to the child sexual abuse prevention program Don't Offend: Germany's Prevention Program. The United States has had a “Help Wanted” study this year to look at what pedophiles report that they needed in adolescence to help them with pedophilia. A great many organizations exist to reduce and eliminate the stigma around mental health issues. We must investigate other alternatives to mandatory reporting. 

"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.