The Student Room Group

Should paedophilia still be considered a disorder?

Currently, paedophiles is a psychiatric disorder, but should it? If yes, why should homosexuality not be a disorder then? Because paedophiles that don't molest children and don't watch child porn aren't doing any harm, surely?

I've recently read this article on a well-known SJW site and it does seem to have a point:
http://www.salon.com/2015/09/21/im_a_pedophile_but_not_a_monster/

The guy hasn't harmed a single kid yet he is still considered to have a disorder...

Scroll to see replies

Original post by Ladbants
Should paedophilia still be considered a disorder?

Most definitely YES
(edited 7 years ago)
Reply 2
Yes it should be because being attracted to children is ****ed up. Anyone who says otherwise is, frankly, deluded.
I think it's classed as a disorder so that pedophiles (or potential pedophiles) can receive treatment to prevent any crime before it happens. It saves children from horrendous experiences and can surely only be a good thing.
No.


It's not a mental illness any more than being straight or gay or bi.
Original post by Trapz99
Yes it should be because being attracted to children is ****ed up. Anyone who says otherwise is, frankly, deluded.


They used to say the same about homosexuals and transgenders - if they are fine, why not pedophiles who don't harm children?
Original post by Trapz99
Yes it should be because being attracted to children is ****ed up. Anyone who says otherwise is, frankly, deluded.


Original post by Hamo2509
I think it's classed as a disorder so that pedophiles (or potential pedophiles) can receive treatment to prevent any crime before it happens. It saves children from horrendous experiences and can surely only be a good thing.


It's bad for them because they have no chance of a romantic life, but that doesn't mean they are ill nor does it mean they are monsters. I'm attracted to women (heterosexual) but that doesn't mean I am a rapist in the same way not every man who is attracted to children is an abuser. It's a really sensitive topic, but I wish people would be adults about it.
Pedophilia is not a sexuality, but a paraphilia (paraphilic disorder). http://www.dsm5.org/Documents/Paraphilic%20Disorders%20Fact%20Sheet.pdf

A defining characteristic of pedophilia that in no way applies to homosexuality-

"have a sexual desire or behavior that involves another person’s psychological distress, injury, or
death, or a desire for sexual behaviors involving unwilling persons or persons unable to give legalconsent."
(edited 7 years ago)
Should a persons cancer tumor still be considered cancer even though the tumor did not kill the patient?
Paedophiles are ****ed up in the head, yes it is a disorder and they should be treated with electric shock treatment.
Original post by Twinpeaks
Pedophilia is not a sexuality, but a paraphilia (paraphilic disorder). http://www.dsm5.org/Documents/Paraphilic%20Disorders%20Fact%20Sheet.pdf

A defining characteristic of pedophilia that in no way applies to homosexuality-

"have a sexual desire or behavior that involves another person’s psychological distress, injury, or
death, or a desire for sexual behaviors involving unwilling persons or persons unable to give legalconsent."


That's completely arbitrary, there is no reason for the classification of even the category of a paraphilia. Gay people feel guilt, they shouldn't, but they do. This is classic leftist pseudoscience.


I want to make clear paedophila should remain illegal on the grounds it harms people, but it cannot be cured precisely because it is a part of them.
Original post by Galaxie501
Should a persons cancer tumor still be considered cancer even though the tumor did not kill the patient?


Cancer does kill people and it can be biologically shown to be biologically alien to the body of the sufferer.
Original post by Anonymous
They used to say the same about homosexuals and transgenders - if they are fine, why not pedophiles who don't harm children?


So by harming children we mean any inappropriate contact with children, and also the viewing of indecent images etc.

Pedophiles who do not harm children have to restrain themselves from strong, frequent desires to either gain contact with a child, or to view indecent content. Having to suppress that desire causes stress, if not distress to the individual. Therefore fulfilling the paraphilic disorder criteria of experiencing your own psychological distress.

Whereas homosexuals can engage homosexual behaviours/ viewing to satisfy their desires, pedophiles 'who don't harm children' never can.
Original post by Ladbants
Currently, paedophiles is a psychiatric disorder, but should it? If yes, why should homosexuality not be a disorder then? Because paedophiles that don't molest children and don't watch child porn aren't doing any harm, surely?

I've recently read this article on a well-known SJW site and it does seem to have a point:
http://www.salon.com/2015/09/21/im_a_pedophile_but_not_a_monster/

The guy hasn't harmed a single kid yet he is still considered to have a disorder...


peadophilia and homosexuality are practically the same, noone controls who they are sexually attracted to. I can sympathise with peadophiles if they aren't child molesters. Also not all child molesters are actually peadophiles. Both could be classed as a disorder as it goes against the norm
Original post by Twinpeaks
So by harming children we mean any inappropriate contact with children, and also the viewing of indecent images etc.

Pedophiles who do not harm children have to restrain themselves from strong, frequent desires to either gain contact with a child, or view to view indecent content. Having to suppress that desire causes stress, if not distress to the individual. Therefore fulfilling the paraphilic disorder criteria of experiencing your own psychological distress.

Whereas homosexuals can engage homosexual behaviours/ viewing to satisfy their desires, pedophiles 'who don't harm children' never can.


Homosexuality is a safe sexuality because two people can be gay and not cause any harm to one another, unlike paedophilia, but none of that actually proves that homosexuality is a sexuality and paedophilia is a paraphilia (which is nothing, it's made up)
Original post by ThoughtOfMan
peadophilia and homosexuality are practically the same, noone controls who they are sexually attracted to. I can sympathise with peadophiles if they aren't child molesters. Also not all child molesters are actually peadophiles. Both could be classed as a disorder as it goes against the norm


It's a crude way of putting it but you are right, liberal morons are only keen to define paedophilia as not a sexuality to differentiate it from homoseuxality, they have no scientific reason beyond society's tastes.
Original post by Twinpeaks
So by harming children we mean any inappropriate contact with children, and also the viewing of indecent images etc.

Pedophiles who do not harm children have to restrain themselves from strong, frequent desires to either gain contact with a child, or to view indecent content. Having to suppress that desire causes stress, if not distress to the individual. Therefore fulfilling the paraphilic disorder criteria of experiencing your own psychological distress.

Whereas homosexuals can engage homosexual behaviours/ viewing to satisfy their desires, pedophiles 'who don't harm children' never can.


Not true - in the future we could make sex robots that look and act like children.
Original post by Brahmin of Booty
That's completely arbitrary, there is no reason for the classification of even the category of a paraphilia. Gay people feel guilt, they shouldn't, but they do. This is classic leftist pseudoscience.


I want to make clear paedophila should remain illegal on the grounds it harms people, but it cannot be cured precisely because it is a part of them.


I hope one day you never find yourself experiencing mental health issues...depression, dementia, stroke induced brain injury etc, because then any help you'd seek would be the product of a pseudoscience. How would you manage? Best to suffer on your own in that case.

No it's not arbitrary, if you bothered to read (can you?) then you'd understand that

"Most people with atypical sexual interests do not have a mental disorder. To be diagnosed with a paraphilic disorder, DSM-5 requires that people with these interests:

feel personal distress about their interest, not merely distress resulting from society’s disapproval;
or
have a sexual desire or behavior that involves another person’s psychological distress, injury, or death, or a desire for sexual behaviors involving unwilling persons or persons unable to give legalconsent.

Tell me how exactly, that is arbitrary? And how the final point relates to homosexuality?

Also, I think you should know son, that pedophiles do respond to treatment (although a working progress), homosexuals do not.

I also feel like adding that, with your dangerous attitude that any study of pedophilia is merely pseudo-scientific nonsense, then the recidivism for child sex crimes would be a lot higher. Research into treatment and also the situational factors that place a child sex offender at risk of recidivism has greatly reduced the rate of repeat offences. So without that little pseudoscience and with an attitude like yours, there'd be a far higher percentage of child sex abuse cases in our society. Your attitude is a dangerous one.
Is it not a disorder?
Yes, and those who succumb to the urges should be hung.

Quick Reply

Latest