Pedophilia - Cured?

[Kitsune]

Many years ago I know a guy who was arrested and imprisoned for Pedophilia. He may have been taught that having sex with children is wrong but I think from certain comments and expressions that he still had desires for children.

Can a Pedophile ever be cured in the sense that they stop desiring children?

[Dargos]

Many years ago I know a guy who was arrested and imprisoned for Pedophilia. He may have been taught that having sex with children is wrong but I think from certain comments and expressions that he still had desires for children.

Can a Pedophile ever be cured in the sense that they stop desiring children?

I am certainly not qualified to answer such a question, but as a prior victim of sexual abuse and as a father of three children I would never trust such an individual around children. Regardless if he was certified “cured” or not.

[PeZook]

It depends on the cause. The cause may be psychological or biological, or a combination thereof.

Even if you can 'cure' (rather than just condition) pedophiles to stop desiring children, it's bound to be an extremely difficult process with a high failure rate. Depending on the cause, there may be a need to physically interfere in the subjects brain.

I hate how the human body is designed. We need better CPUs.

[cosmicalstorm]

Isnt it a bit like asking if you couldnt just come up with a cure for cancer?
There are many different forms and kinds of pedophilia depending on who you ask, for example many of the people who today are considered pedophiles are interested in girls who are in their early puberty (11-14 years), when they are as fertile as they are ever going to be.
"Curing" those people from doing something that evolution has decided is good for the survival of their genes might be pretty hard, you might need to lobotomize them in order to achieve that goal.

[Kanastrous]

I think the question is less, "can they be made to stop desiring children" than "can they be reliably made to stop acting upon the desire." People desire all sorts of damaging, dangerous, socially undesirable things, without doing one iota of damage, unless they act upon that desire.

Since molesters reportedly have a high recidivism rate, the answer is apparently "no." And it's really unreasonable to expect the larger society to take a risk on these offenders, considering the nature and impact of the offense.

[Kitsune]

This whole thought process came "Bubbling" from a few different things.

First, the A.A. Discussion how none of the therapy methods seems to be really very effective

Second, a discussion on another board about an organization called "NARTH" who claims to be able to cure homosexuals.

My thought is if you can actually change any thought process like these.

[Singular Intellect]

I suspect that the problem of being attracted to children is similiar in concept to the condition of being attracted to members of the same sex. It's some type of deviation from the evolutionary purpose of attraction, and blaming someone for it is akin to blaming someone for poor eyesight.

I highly doubt in either case anyone choses who they are attracted to, but in the case of children, it's something that simply cannot work or be tolerated.

IIRC, I read somewhere that many pedophiles actually try very hard to suppress their urges and attractions. But one must admit we can only expect them to have as much success as someone who tries to suppress homosexual urges, or for that matter heterosexual urges.

The fact that one of these mentalities is very harmful, dangerous and shouldn't be tolerated doesn't change it's power over the person in question.

[Pint0 Xtreme]

Second, a discussion on another board about an organization called "NARTH" who claims to be able to cure homosexuals.

NARTH are well known liars. Do a simple search on this board and you should find a number of topics that discuss about them.

[ArmorPierce]

Many years ago I know a guy who was arrested and imprisoned for Pedophilia. He may have been taught that having sex with children is wrong but I think from certain comments and expressions that he still had desires for children.

Can a Pedophile ever be cured in the sense that they stop desiring children?

I hear that some guy 'cured' himself by castrating himself in prison with a shank.

[Alyrium Denryle]

I suspect that the problem of being attracted to children is similiar in concept to the condition of being attracted to members of the same sex. It's some type of deviation from the evolutionary purpose of attraction, and blaming someone for it is akin to blaming someone for poor eyesight.

Sweet Fantastic Darwin you are an idiot. (And I love having enough posts on the subject, and an ever-growing list of ways for evolution to be selected for, that i can blatantly steal my own work and make composite posts)

We know from twin studies that heritability(variation in sexual orientation due to genetics) is 50%, with the other 50% being due to some known, some unknown environmental factors. The ones we know about are in utero in the form of an immune response on the part of the mother, though this is male homosexuality, lesbianism is less heritable (around 40%) and not as well researched. There have been genes found to contribute to homosexuality on the X chromosome, and this is probably part of a quantitative trait locus, with a lot of epistatic effects with qualitative trait loci. (In other words some additive genetic effects, some non-additive classically medelian effects, and a lot of gene interaction) that work together to produce the feminized brain structures observed in homosexual men (lesbians have more masculinized brains, but the underlying mechanisms are less well known)

But how does this happen? Is it a deviation? No.

FIrst off, the term "deviation" implies some sort of objective standard, a normal by which not-normal is defined. This is bullshit, life exists on a massive bell curve. Standard Deviation From the Mean is about the only Deviation you get to talk about.

There are three models that have any legitimacy, and in all of them, bisexuality is the swiss-army knife of social evolution. In fact, none of these models are mutually exclusive, and in fact the rate of homosexuality will be influenced by the interplay of these forces in various conditions, which will explain the differences in the frequency of homosexuality and bisexuality across time and culture.

I am only going to be presenting simplified versions of the models here. If I were to go into every detail I would be here all fucking week.

The first model is an alliance building and competition reduction model. Competition for mates and resources is very strong, and males benefit from forming alliances. Alliances can be cemented by sex. This is why you see subordinate males exchanging sex for protection in prisons for example. Under this model, homosexual behavior will be engaged in by almost any male under the right circumstances (as an aside: Any male will also rape under the correct set of circumstances) and if strict homosexuality exists on the tail end of genetic variation that controls the relative willingness to engage in homosexual behavior (IE sets a conditional threshold) then this model slots in with our understanding of biology and human history very well. You would also expect some form of density dependant control, something that makes it so males are more willing to engage in homosexuality under highly male biased sex ratios. The fraternal birth order effect is an in-utero effect that accomplishes this.

The second model is that brain feminization is a selective advantage in agrarian societies.

Once agriculture developed, selective pressures may have shifted, males now needed to have better linguistic skills, social skills etc. These are traits associated with female brains. Prior to this, aggression and other classically masculine traits would have been favored in males. The easiest way to deal with the new selective pressure is to mediate the masculinization of the default feminine brain during development. Selection will favor optimization, where males are still (mostly)heterosexual(see the above hypothesis for how this slots in), but also have social skills. If these mechanisms are subject to a heterozygote advantage you will end up with a normalized distribution of masculine and feminine traits, with a probability of being (obligately) bisexual(not just flexible, but actively seeking same-sex relations in addition to opposite sex ones) or gay that increases as brain feminization increases. Homosexuality and bisexuality exist on one end of the distribution with lower probabilities and potentially (see below)lower fitness, while the hypermasculine brutes are on the other, also with lower fitness. The best place to be is in the middle with the best traits of both. This mechanism is supported by the high degree of feminine traits (such as landmark navigation, and superior linguistic ability) in homosexuals, as well as high degrees of gender atypical behavior in homosexuals. The fraternal birth order effect probably contributes to this one as well as its proximate mechanism is brain feminization.

The third model goes as follows.

Another route is similar, but relies on bisexuality being an alternative reproductive strategy. Bisexuals have more sexual partners in their lifetimes, tend to begin sexual activity at an earlier age, and also tend to have fewer long-term partners. For males this is an advantage, to an extent, which I will go into shortly. By starting sexual activity earlier, bisexuals have one up on their fellow males. While other men are fumbling about trying to get females to mate with them, bisexual men are already sexually experienced, they attract more mates this way, and not just because they have two target groups. If they attract more mates, they potentially have more offspring. Additionally, if and when they do have a long term partner, they mitigate the risks associated with infidelity by being more practiced at deceit. They often have to cover up their own homosexual activity (which in many cultures is not accepted, which I will get into momentarily as well) this gives them practice hiding indiscretions, which allows them to more effectively walk the tightrope of infidelity and as a result, increase their reproductive success. So, why is obligate bisexuality not more common? Density dependent selection. The more bisexuals there are, the lower the advantage there is to being bisexual, due to disease risk, the increased risk of having obligately homosexual offspring, and the simple fact that the more bisexuals there are the lower the advantage over other males there is. This will optimize obligate bisexuality at a stable, but low frequency, depending on environmental factors that affect selective pressure.

There is no equivalent mechanism for being attracted to children. That does not mean there is not an evolutionary reason. Life does exist on a bell curve after all, and there is a range of ages that males tend to be attracted to. Some men prefer cougars for example... But pre-pubescant? That is hard to swallow. Why? Because there is no proximate mechanism. Obligate homosexuality is the correct phenotype for the wrong sex. Gay men are attracted to the same things straight women are. It is just the result of a genetic and developmental switch being toggled differently.

But being attracted to traits that are not associated with successful reproduction at all is a bit different.

The most plausible explanation I can think of is a developmental mis-wiring. An error. Where their brains associate what what would usually be perceived of as "cute" in the "It is so cute, lets feed it to make it stop crying instead of crushing its soft and easily crushable skull" kind of way, with sexually attractive.

These are your garden variety NAMBLA pedophiles. The ones that actually "love" the kids they traumatize. You probably want to make a distinction between them and the creepy sexual predators. You know, the ones that molest and then murder young children in serial-fashion. That is probably the result of something really fucked up happening in their childhood and the pathology is probably similar to other serial killers.

[Kitsune]

I am real sorry I have to this but there is a new study which shows only a 6.7% relationship between identical twins being gay.

http://www.iserp.columbia.edu/research/ ... 001_04.pdf

I used to agree with you but this study seems to invalidate that completely.

[Kitsune]

Second, a discussion on another board about an organization called "NARTH" who claims to be able to cure homosexuals.

NARTH are well known liars. Do a simple search on this board and you should find a number of topics that discuss about them.

I did and there are some discussions...they use Testimonials.....

What I really need is something like we had for Alcoholics Anonymous which shows statistics that their conversions don't work. If I can, I can actually completely sink the person harping about them

[Spin Echo]

I am real sorry I have to this but there is a new study which shows only a 6.7% relationship between identical twins being gay.

http://www.iserp.columbia.edu/research/ ... 001_04.pdf

I used to agree with you but this study seems to invalidate that completely.

I think you need to do a more thorough literature search. That hasn't been peer reviewed; it's only a working paper. And 2001 is hardly new. Even if that twin study is right, all it shows that the biological nature of homosexuality isn't heritable.

[Alyrium Denryle]

I am real sorry I have to this but there is a new study which shows only a 6.7% relationship between identical twins being gay.

http://www.iserp.columbia.edu/research/ ... 001_04.pdf

I used to agree with you but this study seems to invalidate that completely.

And every other paper ever done has contradicted that one... which it does not seem has actually been, you know, peer reviewed and published. Nor do you seem to know how to read a data table. Those percentages are absolute percentages. I will have to read through the entire (unpublished) paper and rip it apart, but it is 29 pages long. You want a review that was published? Email me at Benjamin.Allen@asu.edu and I will send you my paper collection.

[Alyrium Denryle]

I am real sorry I have to this but there is a new study which shows only a 6.7% relationship between identical twins being gay.

http://www.iserp.columbia.edu/research/ ... 001_04.pdf

I used to agree with you but this study seems to invalidate that completely.

I think you need to do a more thorough literature search. That hasn't been peer reviewed; it's only a working paper. And 2001 is hardly new. Even if that twin study is right, all it shows that the biological nature of homosexuality isn't heritable.

I will be very very blunt. If it has not been published after 7 years, it probably wont be.

[Kitsune]

I am real sorry I have to this but there is a new study which shows only a 6.7% relationship between identical twins being gay.

http://www.iserp.columbia.edu/research/ ... 001_04.pdf

I used to agree with you but this study seems to invalidate that completely.

I think you need to do a more thorough literature search. That hasn't been peer reviewed; it's only a working paper. And 2001 is hardly new. Even if that twin study is right, all it shows that the biological nature of homosexuality isn't heritable.

If you insist I will say "New" to me.....

According to Wiki, where I found the link:
This work was published in the American Journal of Sociology (Bearman, P. S. & Bruckner, H. (2002) Opposite-sex twins and adolescent same-sex attraction. American Journal of Sociology 107, 1179–1205.) and is available only to subscribers. However, a final draft of the paper is available here - there are no significant differences on the points cited between the final draft and the published version.

It kind of sucks because I wrote an article which used the original research which appears to be no longer valid.

I don't care if it is environment or genetics, it does not show that being gay is really changeable.

[Spin Echo]

I don't care if it is environment or genetics, it does not show that being gay is really changeable.

Err. What are you arguing? You seemed to disagree with Alyrium that being gay was biological in nature or heritable.

[Alyrium Denryle]

I don't care if it is environment or genetics, it does not show that being gay is really changeable.

Err. What are you arguing? You seemed to disagree with Alyrium that being gay was biological in nature or heritable.

Indeed Kitsune does. Though, because the literature IS variable on the matter (problem with any sort of social science based upon surveys) one paper does not prove a damn thing. Which is why I have a collection.

On the other hand, I DO have to read this thing. Heh, I have to say so far the Intro is basically saying "Look at us, we sociologists really are relevant!" which is a good sign. I am already noticing other issues with their predictions, so... Fuck I am going to have to write a monstrosity aren't I?

[Kitsune]

I will say that if you can definitively sink the article, please do

[Count Dooku]

I will say that if you can definitively sink the article, please do

It's a common misconception to believe that just because something isn't genetic, it isn't biological. We know that when in the womb, being blasted by testosterone can have an effect on the inhabitant of said womb. It's really/probably a combination of genetic factors, what happens in the womb, and the environment one is raised in. I doubt homosexuality can be attributed to any one of those things.

And if it's the person's choice, so what? I am not turned on by other men, at all, but I don't get scared, angry, or feel different at all when around men who do get turned on by other men.

[Alyrium Denryle]

I will say that if you can definitively sink the article, please do

It's a common misconception to believe that just because something isn't genetic, it isn't biological. We know that when in the womb, being blasted by testosterone can have an effect on the inhabitant of said womb. It's really/probably a combination of genetic factors, what happens in the womb, and the environment one is raised in. I doubt homosexuality can be attributed to any one of those things.

And if it's the person's choice, so what? I am not turned on by other men, at all, but I don't get scared, angry, or feel different at all when around men who do get turned on by other men.

Isn't phenotypic plasticity fun?

Basically, your genes dont just code for phenotype X and hope you live in an environment conducive to X. Your genes actually code for phenotypes X, Y and Z, the expression of which are controlled by environmental conditions.

Figuring out what genes control what with humans is very very hard. First off, they are redundant, one gene has several functions and it is just a matter of when and where they are expressed. Then there is the pesky little problem of not being able to create knock-out babies. Yes, I said knock-out babies, where we destroy a gene and see what effect it has on development.

If you have ten genes that act during sex differentiation in the brain, each with a big allele and a small allele A and a for example, and you need 7 big alleles to have a significant chance of developing gay, but they are not specific as to which ones, you probably wont find them, they will get lost in the statistical background noise. To use an example. Mostly because the experiments required to do the work will never, ever get past an institutional review board(damn ethics committees... I hate them sooooo much).


But I am getting ahead of myself. I have a big post to write in the AIDS thread, and then a paper to read and critique.

[Stark]

I did and there are some discussions...they use Testimonials.....

What I really need is something like we had for Alcoholics Anonymous which shows statistics that their conversions don't work. If I can, I can actually completely sink the person harping about them

If they use 'testimonials' to buttress their claims, they're almost certianly a scam. If they had actual real evidence, they'd use that, instead of people saying 'yeah I'm not gay now, and I'd sure never admit to it or my parents will send me back to the concentration camp'.

[Kitsune]

If they use 'testimonials' to buttress their claims, they're almost certianly a scam. If they had actual real evidence, they'd use that, instead of people saying 'yeah I'm not gay now, and I'd sure never admit to it or my parents will send me back to the concentration camp'.

I found a source which gives a 4% success rate...a very elastic success rate:
http://primetimersstl.org/Documents/The ... herapy.pdf

His comment back was "It only takes ONE" where I stated "All it takes is ONE person to commit suicide because of them"

[Kitsune]

This one is actually better:
http://www.mlp.org/resources/evanstalk.html