Merle Noir

Yes and No. I call myself by both because I am both. I think Pedophile needs to be understood by its proper definition and not confused with legal definitions based on a crime. Pedophile is some one attracted to a child nothing more nothing less. However Pedophile does not distiguish the nature of the attraction. So Boylover informs people I'm attracted not to all children but specifically boys. Reverse for a Girl lover. However many prefer to use Boylover/Girllover to escape what they see as the negative bagage associated with the title Pedophile. To me it is entirely how the word is used that is important. A person can say Boylover negatively just as they can say pedophile negatively. For better understanding of that see my comments to your next question. I think your confusing the your reaction to the object of the attraction, i.e. you are repulsed that someone finds a child sexually atractive, with the emotions that are, in and of themselves, what make up attraction. Put another way we are not comparing an adult man and women to a boy or girl. We are comparing the attraction, the desire that is within a persons mind, of how a non-pedophile feels towards a man or a woman, next to how a pedophile might feel for a boy and a girl. Or to try to put it in a different context attraction is that you find someone very beuatiful and are drawn or attraacted to that beauty. Just as you may not agree with your girlfriends about what guys are attractive we don't agree about what age is attractive. But your girlfriends feelings that a guy's are attractive are just the same feeling with a difference in term of the object of the attraction... the guy. SAme here my feelings of attraction are just the same with a difference interms of the oject of the attraction... the age. To break up the quote: "be more or less exactly the same"Tthe exactly the same part is the feeling we get looking at someone we find attractive... the more or less part is the differences in opinion we may have about the attractiveness of the person.

A Pedophilia IS a Paraphilia. In fact the APA is discussing should it be removed as a Paraphilia. -http://www.psych.org/news_room/press_releases/diagnosticcriteriapedophilia.pdf- -http://www.cnsnews.com/Culture/Archive/200306/CUL20030611c.html- I would point out this Quote from the CNSnews link Coral Rhedd I notice a lot of your sources you are providing are legal related links. That is fine they are valid and I don't dispute the information provided with in. However keep in mind this is a psychology forum not a law forum. The reason I say that is for law enforcement purposes a Pedophile and a sex offender are the same thing. They will often point out not all Pedophiles are sex offenders but then go out to interchange the two terms because for their purpose and roll it makes little difference, although does cause confusion of what the terms mean. With in Psychology a Pedophile is defined by attraction alone not by behavior. Because unlike law enforcement Psychiatry is all about what is happening in the mind they have to make a further distinction between someone that simply has a desire and someone that acts on that desire. A pedophile in psychology is defined by his/her thoughts and desires not by their actions.

Well there have been other questions but I think his original question is primarily a good one. Your right of course you don't know what you would do its too large of a leap and to many variables. But instead of answering what would you do I'd say can you empathies with what it might be like? Or maybe better is can you say what you would hope you would do if roles where reversed? What kind of decissions and attitudes might you hope you would make in such a situation? Then I'd add in can you go the next step further and re-read what you've written and applying it to this hypothetical you? Pedophiles are human just like you we have the same capacity to try to decide what is right and wrong. We have the same capacity to love and hate. We have the same capacity to do harm and good. I'm sure you must have some aspect in your life where you feel the actions or even opinions of others are unfairly applied to you because of some commonality. From reading your posts and others comments I am inclined to think you may be politically conservative. As a conservative I know I hate the assumptions of racism and homophobia (actually I like it cause it makes me laugh so as a homosexual pedophile) and closemendedness that many apply to me. Just as a Pedophile I hate the assumtions of being a child molester which is a much more serious charge.

I don't necessarily believe that children will on their own show wisdom beyond their years. Children learn about sexuality just like they learn to walk and learn to talk. Some may learn faster other slower some may have better teachers others worse. Children are curious about sex its only natural they have a deep curiosity about everything. Sexuality is a part of everyone and just as a child learns about their body and their surrounding little by little they also learn about their sexuality step by step. Considering that many parents avoid any discussion with their child about sex until probably after the child is probably more knowledgeable then the parents think its easy for some children to innocently be more knowledgeable. For example a child whose parents openly talks about sex and when asked for explanations by their child give honest truthful explanations will have a child seemingly knowledgeable beyond their years then a child whose parents want to hide sex and sexuality from them till they are 18 in some hopes of preserving a myth of innocence. I am a little bit confused on the question especially what is meant by the phrase "channeled toward intelligent choices beyond their wisdom?" Do you mean can children be instructed so they will make choices that they might not be able to make due to lack of understanding. Certainly we do it all the time, any responsible parent does it more so with younger children but even teens. I'd fully recommend teaching your kids very early on to say no if someone tries to touch them in an inappropriate way or in an inappropriate place. (obviously with language a little less technical) I would warn against going over board its easy to terrorize a child thinking you need to over emphasize things. When I was an older teen and still rationalized that children wanted sex I was not only stopped from crossing that line but also woke up to my rationalization by a child that thankfully had been given just such instructions. We're still very good friends even though he's not a boy anymore. In fact at times I'm deeply touched by how close he seems to be. Just little things like him inviting me to go to a movie with him and his friends. When I say his friends probably don't want some old man tagging along he says thats their problem I'd like you to come along. As a pedophile to me thats a much bigger rush then sex can ever provide and something that is meaningful that will last beyond the moment. However keep in mind such guidance only goes so far. Once the child learns enough to begins to question that guidance they will start working out decisions on their own. So a responsible parent needs to follow up have an open honest discussion with the child and be close enough and aware enough that the child is questioning what they've been told. It's reasonable to think of a very young child will follow what a parent says but at some point they will learn enough to say I can do this on my own and if the parent is relying on simple yes, no instructions from several years earlier then they are deceiving themselves. Not sure if I answered your question or not but hopefully I went broad enough for you to find what you where looking for.

Good point on the virus's. I hope that is a large part of it. I'll drop the internet part of the porn question as I see no relevance other then it is the primary method of distribution these day. Like so much it has to be further defined. What is Class 1 in the UK I can tell you I likely have in a Magazine I buy in a Book store, and will likely go and pick up tomorrow if I get a chance. The magazine only has a couple photographs it's mostly book reviews movie reviews and then a feature story along the lines of what is discussed here. Of the photographs most would not even be Class 1 in the UK but a few probably are. Generally I find fully clothed pictures more interesting to look at then nudity. In terms of the kind of porn I'm sure you mean, the kind that comes to mind when the topic is mentioned. I don't care for it in the least. I think it is a terrible rot with in the Pedophile community. I can certainly understand the interest in it, like a hetero man that may not buy hard core porn of women can still understand the interest other men have in it. However I think its like a drug it may provide a bit of pleasure but then you have to find the next better high. Like a drug its defended as being a victimless crime. There is now what is called Virtual Porn. It is computer generated pictures and video of simulated boys and men having sex. I've looked at this as well as the Japanese cartoons mentioned earlier. I think with a bit better graphics the Virtual porn could be arousing but its just a road I'd rather not go down. I have found some of the Japanese cartoons very interesting but I find the result is I want to find more and something a bit more aggressive and some of that can be extremely aggressive as it is. There is debate about Virtual Porns legality since the argument a child has to be abused can not be made. Some argue that it is a release that helps keep things undercontrol. Personally I don't know if thats true or not. I can say that my experience is you always start wanting something a bit more aggressive. I don't know where that trend may lead if it could lead to abuse but I just don't care to have my career ruined and risk jail time because it led to pics that where illegal. I've seen enough problems Pedophiles have gotten themselves into because of porn and I don't want to risk it.

Actually the US AoC varies from state to state. Many have 18 as an AoC but the majority are lower. It also depends what kind of relationship your talking about. AoC's very for heterosexual and homosexual relationships. They even can very for Gay Male and Lesbian relationships. With in the US a lot of the AoC are having to be rewritten as a result of a Supreme court ruling a few years ago. BTW Madagascar is where they have the AoC of 21. You can find out pretty much all you want at http://www.ageofconsent.com/ There are a lot of studies done around the world. However with relatively few exceptions the AoC limits it to an older teen. That is ephebophilia which is similar but brings in some variables. The reason I like to try to establish what age people are talking about is I tend to assume my own age of attraction range. I once had a long debate with an Ephebophile about sex only to discover he was attracted to older teens and was talking about 15 to 18 yo's. Once I found that out I had to basically say I agree with you totally as I think an AoC of 14 or 15 is about right even though it is above what I am attracted to. However even when it may be legal or blindly accepted even if technically illegal it is still something people keep quiet about. While say a couple in Thailand where the is no AoC for male homosexual relationships may be legal Asian culture generally looks at sex as something to be kept private and quiet. I suspect it is much easier to find samples by asking therapists to refer patients for studies or search out adults that had relationships as a boy or a girl and study that side then head of around the world. Cultural differences may not be important in some aspects but can be a huge factor in other aspects as well.

Dak I got bad news for you. Despite attempt after attempt after attempt from pedophiles that oppose AoC laws, your story there has done more to make me thing AoC laws are wrong then any attempt they have made. I haven't changed my mind yet but you gave me food for thought in a way I'm sure you never intended. I think from my previous posts I've made it clear but I'll repeat that I pretty much agree 100% with you about AoC laws. However I totally disagree with your analogy on drinking and in applying that to AoC laws makes me wonder if we're wrong. Growing up my parents offered me wine with Sunday night dinner. I was often allowed a beer at family get together's or other events. My parents never let me drink more then one glass so I would not get drunk but would let me drink when ever I wanted, which really was never, but I would accept when it was offered. When most my friends and class mates started to drink they did so behind their parents back. After so many years of being denied alcohol when they had a chance they drank very excessively. I have always felt that these age limits in terms of Alcohol especially when aggressively enforced do more to make a Pandora's box effect then to protect those not ready. Reading your story and your post I can't help and think you learned about drinking on your own there was no Adult holding your hand helping you cross the street. In my case my parents drank with me for many years before I ever ventured out to drink on my own I can't remember my first drink I was offered thats how long I have been drinking. At first it was a sip or two but about 11 or 12 I was allowed a glass of my own and a few years later a full glass. When I did drink on my own I mostly drank a small amount. I did eventually drink too much copying my friends lead but I returned to drinking a small reasonable amounts. My best friend has now given up alcohol all together for fear he may become an alcoholic a few other class mates and friends still drink excessively or have given up alcohol all together because it was such a problem in their life. My Nieces and Nephew where also offered alcohol at a lower age then I originally was and now in their late teens they still turn down beer and wine at dinner. Why should it be any different with sex. If age limits for drinking creates a Pandora's box effect by denying the child access to something they think they are ready for then why would it not have the same effect on sex. To use your holding the child's hand analogy no one was there holding your hand. You ended up crossing the street of alcohol alone with out someone holding your hand. Your first experience with Alcohol was entirely on your own. I'd also say that the reason you so wanted to try it out was precisely because it was prohibited. The law had all the right intentions no doubt about it, but the right intentions did not help you avoid the dangers it actually left you abandoned to find out these dangers alone or in the company of other inexperienced people. The result nearly, or if not nearly then could, have cost you your life. Great, good intentions you just have to ignore those unintended consequences. So why should things be all that different for children and sex. My first offer of sex was when I was probably 9 I turned it down. I can't recall my parents ever teaching me to say no it was just not of any interest. I understood it was sex although nothing really beyond that. At 9 I know for myself I was certainly not ready to have sex and since the offer was from a boy almost my same age there would not have been much experience (actually I suspect he was very experienced but don't really know) We deny kids sex, why? so we can hold onto a Myth of purity and innocence. Are we really doing them any favors by making sex into such a taboo and mysterious Pandora's box. As well what are we really protecting them from. The only thing I can come up with is the over reaction likely to occur when adults learn of whats happening. Thats not a problem with sex thats a problem with adults. Disease is a possibility but heck we are trying to teach them to use condoms I suspect they are going to be much more likely to use them if they grow up using them. Now I must say again I am throwing this out just as a thought that occurred to me. I have not fully back down from my position that AoC laws must remain at least till attitudes change. However look at the history a bit. AoC laws started to occur around the late 1800's to early 1900's. They largely came about due to labor laws as children put out of work wanted to make money and sex was a great way to do it. Over the decades since AoC laws have climbed in most countries from 12 in most places to 16, 18 even 21 in one location. But then a new problem, well probably an old problem but a growing problem of teen age mothers. So the result is we have to start teaching them about sex. But who teaches them and what do we teach them. Abstinence or Condom use? do we teach just Heterosexual sex or Homosexual sex? do we tell them masturbation is OK or tell them Masturbation is a terrible thing? Do parents teach them or the Government? How young do we teach them? Of course all the while kids are experimenting with sex. 17yo becomes a registered sex offenders for getting caught with his 16yo girlfriend. 12yo's are sent to sex offender therapy for mutual masturbation with a friend. 9yo's are arrested when caught looking at each other under a classroom desk. A 15yo is sent threw Aversion therapy for playing inappropriately with his little brother. All now justified as protecting our kids from the dirty pedophile in the park, or in a chatroom these days. Are we really protecting them or are we scarring them with lessons of sex is dirty, be ashamed of your body. The intention used to Justify AoC laws is well and good just like the intention behind Drinking age limits but what are the real effects of this. This is rather lacking in references I realize largely because I'm kind of hypothesizing here I believe I can back up most of what I say but I'll need to research this a bit. As that may take a while I'm throwing this out for criticism and thoughts.

Hmmm I suspect I know where you got the quote However giving proper credit needs a bit more research as I can't tell you who said it either. However it appears to be from a book that is the basis of a report by Gunter Schmidt Universitat Hamburg, Germany. However it may very well be that it was Gunter Schmidt that wrote it and someone else possible this web sight is sourcing him in a way that I find confusing. Assuming Gunter Schmidt is referencing a book in this details paper the name of the author of the book does not appear to be given. The only reference is the Author. I'm sure with a bit of digging the name of the Author can be discovered The source that I have it from is -http://www.mhamic.org/sources/schmidt.htm- and the full qoute can be found at the very bottom of the page.

Well yes I am completely concerned about what damage the child may suffer. Thats why I won't engage in sex even when the opportunity has presented itself and yes it has presented itself. As an adult I know where things will lead even when the child may or may not, and I simply change the activity or excuse myself from the child's company or even just say no usually with an explanation as to why I can't. Like I've said my relationship with boys is purely that of a mentor, or a good friend. I can not think of any damage mental or physical that could come from the relationships I have. Considering that the relationships last well beyond my attraction and remain the same platonic friendships that they where from the start any damage or harm that may come will have nothing to do with my being a pedophile.

Good question and I suppose I did over simplify that statement a bit. In my own case at 12 I was worried I was gay. I even told my best friend I was scared I was gay. He told me that I should not worry it may be something I'll grow out of. What I did not say was something I could not fully admit to myself till about a year later. I was the oldest child in my class yet there was only a couple boys in my class I might say I was attracted to and they where toward the younger end of the age range in my class. However I noticed that I was much more attracted to the younger brothers of many of my class mates. I did hold on to hope that I would grow out of it but as I grew older it became more and more obvious that I was not growing out of it and more difficult to deny that my attraction was not to my own age group. Other pedophiles also relate that they realized that they where not simply gay but also attracted to boys younger then their own age group. In fact a youthful sex offender is defined by the AACAP (American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry) as someone having sex including consensual sex with someone 2 to 5 years younger. My attraction at 12 was not to other 12yo's but to kids more then 2 years younger then my own age group. BTW 1/3 to 1/2 of sex offenses against children are carried out by juveniles. -http://www.csom.org/pubs/juvbrf10.html- So to look back at your question again I did not fully know that I was a pedophile I was aware that I might be do to a few things I found unusual but I was hopeful that I may outgrow it. Especially as I am and was, attracted to women I held on to hope till I was probably around 17 or 18 that heterosexuality would come to be a more dominant attraction. However at 10 or so I began to withdraw from my friendships. I was not aware of being a pedophile but I know I started associating with kids in my own age group less and less, in preferance for boys about 2 grades below me. By 13 I had only one friend who is still my Best Friend to this day. He is in my own age group in fact 30 days younger then me so a bit of an exception. He remained my friend largely because I can tell him anything but he does not pressure me and try to pry deeper to find out what might be behind a comment. My privacy is something I still closely guard and hate people that don't give me enough space and privacy.

Thank you Sayonara³, I was a bit surprised to read the reasoning for closing the thread when I went to post last night. I was not surprised as I am used to being banned, or other wise forced to keep quiet so people don't have their point of view challenged and with other Pedophiles joining in I can understand the reactions and concerns that have likely been raised. However in reading the reason for closing the thread I could not help but thing if discussion of Pedophilia which is listed as a paraphilia on APA's DSM then where possibly could be a better location to discuss the topic then a Psychiatry/Psychology section of a science forum. I saved the post I wrote last night while this was being posted and it does have references to studies. Being new here I'm not sure what extent things need to be referenced I have the studies and papers sited and can add links if need be but currently do not have them linked to any internet sources. Well I would hope that anything you've said in this reply doesn't get you suspended. I don't see anything here that would be deserving of such action. Well such pedophiles do exist, there is no way I can deny their existence, and it pains me deeply to have to be associated with such creeps, but what do you actually know about pedophiles. More then likely my guess would be its based on what you've read about sex offenders. Things based on Myths junk sceince and lazy reporting or just plain bad reporting in the media. To base your opinion of heterosexuals solely on abusive spouses and rapists and you'd have not much better opinion of heterosexuals. However everyone knows heterosexuals so news reports of abuse and rape get adjusted for our life experiences and put into a more accurate truth. Same can be said of Homosexuals who abuse their partners at much the same rate as heterosexuals and are certainly not immune from rape either. While homosexuals are not as well known to everyone I think it safe to say in todays society most everyone knows at least a few people we can identify as homosexuals. Again we can counter negative reports we here about homosexuals with our knowledge of what most homosexuals are really like. In the case of homosexuals it was not many decades ago that in most countries that this was not the case. Homosexuals where accused of rape told they are sick and need to get help. Society demanded that therapists change and cure homosexuals police would root them out arrest them for commiting a crime. if your not familiar with how things where prior to Stonewall in the US read this for a brief discription. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2000/06/23/DD33GAY.DTL I especially like this bit: "1964: CONTAGION IN THE HAIGHT A resident fresh from battling a crosstown freeway turned his attention to a gay movie house in Haight-Ashbury: ``Any form of deviation, sexual or freeway, is not good for this neighborhood.'' Another resident was ``afraid for our children. Homosexuality is disease, a contagious one.'' " Now certainly pedophilia is different then Homosexuality. They are not identical as is plainly obvious. I would not try to say that because a homosexual can have sex with an adult partner that a pedophile should be allowed to have sex with a child. However pedophiles, like it used to be for homosexuals, are subject to outrageous misinformtion. I read comments about pedophilia even in this forum, a Science forum, that are about as scientifically based as the comment above about homosexuality being contagious. I can laugh about the homosexual comments because it is no longer accepted by people as the truth. Pedophiles are shunned and hated, but we are not really known, which is pretty understandable the biggest fear is the fear of the unknown. You probably know a great many pedophiles that you love respect and care for but are unaware of their pedophilia. Studies have indicated that over 25% of men have some degree of pedophilia.(Hall et al., 1995.) Thats not to say that all +25% are preferentially attracted but rather that they have some measureable level of arousal to children. In terms of preferential attraction prison based studies indicate about .5% however these are very unreliable as they are ONLY convicted sex offenders. (Feierman, 1990a) by comparison a University of New Mexico theory predicts 7 to 10% of men are preferentially attracted. (feierman, 1990a) However you look at it, its a large portion of society and as I say likely you know some Pedophiles that you respect but don't know it. Interestingly enough a number of studies indicate that most sex offenders are not preferentially attracted to children.(Freund, 1981; Okami & Goldberg, 1992) Many engage in Sexual behavior with children for situational problems like marital problems, alcoholism or unavailability of Adult partners(Howells, 1981; Sandfort, 1987.) I'm certain that you like most people don't want kids to come to any harm especially any kind of long term type harm. Unfortunately the hatred of pedophiles effectively may fuel exactly that. Thats not to say society is to blame people have to take responsibility for their actions and when they do something wrong take the consequences. However when society is creating conditions where that wrong is easier justify to ones self that also needs to be stopped. Thats my concern here, its why I value honesty so much and why I come to forums like this and talk about myself the pedophiles I know and the problems. Ramin talked earlier about isolation, and while I'm not completely sure he and I are talking about the same thing isolation is a problem and even a theory on pedophilia. The actual theory is Isolated minority syndrome (Fog, 1992.) Not physical isolation but a self imposed mental isolation resulting from stigmatism associated with being hated and villainized by society. Pedophiles at a very early age become aware of the hatred that society has for them. The response to this hatred is to close off contact with others put up emotional barriers to keep the hatred out. Unfortunately these are the worst things that can be done. Behind these self imposed walls people can rationalize all kinds of things. When I was 13 I used to say hey sex is fun I like sex all boys naturally like sex so whats the big deal. (I won't get into the rest of my rationalization as it is not very clean) Unfortunately the only one that heard these ideas where the famous trio me, myself, and I. Considering the potential that this rationalizing in a box can result in, and the prevalence of pedophilia its a wonder that we don't see more sex offenders. Especially if the studies indicating most sex offenders are not preferentially attracted to minors is true. However as I see it the isolation problem does not end with pedophiles. Pedophiles isolate ourselves from society to protect ourselves from the hatred directed towards us. This in turn means society does not know what or whom a pedophile really is and does not know what makes a person a child molester. When science can not study something we tragically see all to often myths and misconceptions are bound to arise. This just fuels more hatred and more isolation and more fear. There are many theories on Pedophilia, and I think in terms of preferentially attracted pedophiles that offend the isolation theory is pretty good. However I do believe the studies showing most sex offenders to be non-preferentially attracted is also true. At first I found it hard to believe but when I considered that when your on the edge and your dominant attraction is to someone socially acceptable you won't dwell on this other aspect as much. The result is that when an opportunity arises a non-preferentially attracted person will likely not have spent the time to consider the proper response. The result is that emotions and desires that have been repressed, denied, and or ignored take over. People can do just about anything and if we know of a problem we can take steps to fix them we can minimize risks all kinds of things. But sadly when it comes to pedophilia people prefer to stick their head in the sand allow fear to drive witch hunt type behavior.

Ramin I'm glad to see you replying I enjoyed some of your comments earlier in the discussion although I must say I find it difficult to understand all of what you say. There is nothing that can be done about pedophilia. No one has found a cure the best that can be done is tortured till you repress your sexuality. However I have meet many Pedophiles and I can tell you most of them are like me, we have very full lives Pedophilia is nothing more then our attraction. Some people like men some like women some like farm animals we like kids. To that extend there is no difference. When someone can cure Heterosexuality or can cure Homosexuality then my guess is pedophilia will also be curable. However believe me if willing it away was at all possible I'd have stopped being a pedophile when I was 12 or 13. In fact I came up on my own with a version of aversion therapy that is often used by therapists... and like the results therapists get it only worked so long as I kept torturing myself... and even then it was far from a cure or even treatment. Who says that we are sex focused. Personally I think there are so many other more important aspects to talk about with Pedophilia then sex. However when talking to Non-pedophiles about the subject sex seems to be the dominant focus... I guess because its what most people know and associate with pedophiles. Rather boring two dimensional view in my opinion. The relationships I have had with boys in my life have been a mentoring relationship. Absolutely nothing sexual about them. The only aspect in which sex has any role is that I find them sexually attractive. However aside from a thought in my mind nothing more comes of it. However for having that thought many would want me locked away, have their kids sent off to therapy to be told how victimized and abused they have been.

That has absolutely no relevence to weather pedophilia is classified as a mental ilness or not. Sure its a valid argument on the legality and even morality of such an act, but pyschology and law are two seperate areas. By your theory an abstonant pedophile like myself is not sick as bettina said and I'm glad to hear that as I knew it all along but psychology is not based on your moral judgments on behaviour. To put it another way a mental illness is internal to the singular individual. It is not dependant on characteristics of outside individuals.

I've finally managed to read all the replies... OK I did just skim over some of the sexism stuff and the discussion of girls fashion. I'm trying to figure out a way to respond to the AoC debate between BourBohemian and Dak. BourBohemian I must say I'm thrilled to hear that you had a positive experience. I think a great many such relationships probably are exactly that. When you consider that there have been many societies that accepted Man/Boy relationships I must figure that it can work. Personally as much as I hate the absoluteness of AoC laws I think in todays society they are a must. I would like to see them reformed I think there are things that can be done to take away some of the absolutism inherent in them. However I don't imagine they will ever be repealed. However my bigger concern is how they are enforced these days. Its well and good to say that a man penetrating a 9yo boy may be abuse and we should prohibit it out of concern alone. However people are arrested and charged with sex offense against minors for many many reasons that are not so abusive. In California a man was arrested, convicted for sucking kids toes. I can certainly imagine the trauma that these children must have suffered having their toes sucked. I'm sure society feels much safer knowing a toe sucking pedophile is off the street, and that these children will have an army of therapists coming in to make certain they have the resources needed to deal with the trauma of being so brutally victimized. I think to my own childhood and I must say today a great many adults in my life would be charged as child molesters for things I still see as completely natural normal occurrences that are where not sexual. Thats not to say someone may not have gotten sexually aroused by this but if they did I'm still completely unaware of it. Once I was effectively bribed to go skinny dipping. It was at a camp and not sure who's idea it was but the counselors and volunteer parents had no problem with skinny dipping. The bribe came in that some of the kids on the beach too scared to skinny dip themselves could not see anything so a counselor offered up free s'mores to anyone that showed off private parts of their bodies. Probably inappropriate yes but nothing I see as reason for hysterics but if told to the wrong person the authorities would certainly investigate and likely have found someone to be charged with a crime. There is very much an irrational hysteria concerning this subject with abuse automatically assumed. It's interesting as I read the posts to see BourBohemian talking repeatedly about the abuse of the system. Its natural to want to believe that since society has the best intentions and wants to help kids that it can't do harm. Yet there are families even communities torn apart by over zealous DA's and therapists intent on finding harm where non exists. Dak and others seem more then willing to close their eyes to horrific abuse from a machine like system to error on the side of caution when it comes to potential abuse from Pedophiles. Fair enough but what protections are there against the system itself causing abuse where there previously was none. What punishment is handed out, what recourse do victims of over zealous therapists and DA's have. Theres a lot of money, fame and successful careers to be made in saving society from the evil Pedophile waiting to steal away children's innocence. If is a powerful emotion and society honors those it sees as helping to relieve our fear. That puts a lot of potential for abuse in those peoples hands just as the indifference of power between a child and a pedophile puts a lot of potential for abuse in the hands of a pedophile

First of all since I'm a newbie here let me explain I am a Pedophile... in fact a Boylover as I see has been brought up in the later part of this topic... I will add I have not finished reading all the replies as this post is very long. There are a few misconceptions here one of the ones that tends to be a pet peeve is the notion that all pedophiles are sexual abusers. Pedophilia refers to an attraction it does not refer to any act. Pederasty is more associated with those that engage in sex with children although it does not necessarily mean an abusive relationship many people in todays society would see any sexual relation as abusive. Much of the discussion that I have seen here is a common discussion among-st pedophiles. Pedophiles as a community very greatly there are people who would never engage in sexual activities with children all the way up to the serial molests we read about in newspapers. By enlarge most pedophiles are not much different then any one else. Just as there are abusive hetero and homosexual there are sadly Abusive Pedophiles.