Basically what it says on the tin. Having read though some of the materials on the issue, I am baffled by how recklessly the word is used, given the consequences of such usage.

Pedophiles are the people with sexual attraction to prepubescent children. It doesn’t matter whether they do or don’t act on that attraction; in fact, many don’t. It is a sexual interest/mental condition that cannot be reliably changed.

Child molesters, on the other hand, are not necessarily pedophiles - in fact, 50 to 75% of child molesters do not have pedophilic interest.

Both facts can be sourced from the respective Wikipedia article and more info can be found in respective research.

Why does this matter?

Because the current use of the word reinforces stigma around pedophilia and makes it less likely for people with pedophilic disorder to reach out for help for the fear they would be outed and treated the same as actual child abusers.

This, in turn, makes those in a vulnerable position more likely to cross the line and get into the category of child abusers instead of coming for help. Also, it heavily affects people who did nothing to deserve such treatment.

What should we do?

We should leave the word “pedophile” to the context in which it belongs, which is the mental health and sexuality spheres, and avoid using the term to describe sexual offenders against minors. At the very least, one would most likely be wrong. At most, one would participate in the cycle of child abuse.

  • Admiral Patrick@lemmy.world
    shield
    M
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    Good truly unpopular opinion, and mostly good discussion on the points made. That said, I think pretty much all the points that were going to be made have been made. Locking thread.

  • Lemminary@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    My unpopular opinion is that pedophilia is a paraphilia and not necessarily a mental condition, even though some cases do manifest that way. But maybe I’m wrong. Please, go easy with the lynching.

    • Allero@lemmy.todayOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      True!

      Pedophilia by itself is not considered to be a disorder starting with DSM-V/ICD-11.

      However, if pedophilic thoughts cause distress or may lead to dangerous behaviors, it is seen as a pedophilic disorder, which remains in both medical classifications.

      Should have made this point clear.

  • kitnaht@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    Pedophiles are bad people. Regardless of if they have ‘offended’ or not. I’m okay with chemically, or physically castrating them to help remove those urges, or putting them to death. I don’t care about their feelings or if they’re mixed up with child molesters.

    • shalafi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Attraction is not a choice. If you believe it is, tell me when you chose to be attracted to whatever floats your boat.

      • GBU_28@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        What I’m attracted to includes consent.

        Being attracted to something that can’t consent is not alike other attractions.

        Edit downvotes from people who think consent is optional.

        • Zorque@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          Right, which is why we seek non-punitive ways to help correct that attraction.

          A thing doesn’t not have to be universally equal to be similar to another.

          • GBU_28@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            Don’t disagree with finding ways to help people. In this or my other comment I never said pedos aren’t deserving of medical treatment

            Edit but my point was that not all attractions are valid. Only consent based attractions are valid.

        • Allero@lemmy.todayOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          The attraction is not defined by the consent of the other party. You would be attracted to the same people even if dating them would hurt them. You’re just lucky not to, it never was a moral choice.

          Now what is a moral choice is what you do with such attraction. And celibacy in relation to such potentially damaging attraction is the only moral option.

          • GBU_28@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            The point is that variety of attraction is not ok. It is not like any other attractions

            Edit it should not be normalized or accepted. It should be treated as a critical issue.