Categories
Uncategorized

Red Pill Redditor: Dating a rape victim is like dating a pedophile

This "should" logic makes a lot more sense
This “should” logic makes a lot more sense

The Purple Pill Debate subreddit is a strange little corner of the internet, a place where intrepid Blue Pillers try to logic Red Pillers into giving up their repugnant ideology, and vice versa.

The main problem with this strategy is that Red Pillers don’t really understand logic as you or I do. They’ve got their own version, and it’s pretty … weird, as one recent post in r/PurplePillDebate makes abundantly clear.

The proposition being debated: “If you expect a man to date a rape victim, then you should be willing to date a pedophile.”

Wait, what? The Red Piller advancing this, er, argument tries to explain in more detail what exactly he means:

Rape victims often develop a variety of serious psychological issues, including depression, borderline personality disorder (aka borderline insanity disorder), self-harm, alcohol and/or drug addiction, and PTSD.

People who have these serious psychological issues are at a higher risk of joblessness, homelessness, and divorce. They tend to have unstable and chaotic relationships.

Now, of course it isn’t a rape victim’s fault that they were raped, but that still doesn’t mean that it is a good idea to date a rape victim.

So far, not so good. All of the sources the poster cites as evidence for these claims about rape survivors are behind paywalls, but a quick scan of the abstracts suggest that he didn’t read them very carefully. One of the papers he cites, actually looking at the effects of childhood sexual abuse rather than rape per se, reports that, contrary to the poster’s claims,

there is insufficient evidence to confirm a relation between a history of childhood sexual abuse and a postsexual abuse syndrome and multiple or borderline personality disorder.

 

That said, there’s no question that rape (or any kind of sexual abuse) can be extremely traumatic, with far-reaching and long-lasting consequences. These can certainly cause issues in relationships.

But every relationship has issues, and there is absolutely no evidence that rape survivors — or the survivors of any other serious trauma — are incapable of having healthy relationships.

At this point, our Red Pill poster goes completely off the rails:

Dating someone who has serious psychological issues is risky. To illustrate how risky it is, would you date a pedophile? Pedophilia isn’t a choice. However, pedophiles have unstable lives and wouldn’t make good romantic partners.

So, if you expect a man to be willing to date a rape victim because “it wasn’t her fault,” then you should be willing to date a pedophile because “it isn’t his fault.”

Wow. There are at least two gigantic problems here. First, of course, is the inherent offensiveness of suggesting there’s some sort of moral equivalency between pedophiles (potential if not necessarily actual predators) with rape survivors (people who have themselves been victimized by predators).

Second, there’s insurrectono’s if-then logic, which is utterly inappropriate when it comes to matters of the heart, where “should” shouldn’t go.

No, Red Pillers, no one is telling you that you are obligated to date rape survivors — or, for that matter, cancer patients, or Billy Joel fans, or indeed anyone in any particular category that human beings fall into.

Indeed, if your first thought upon hearing that someone us a rape survivor is to think “ick, she’s probably all messed up,” guess what?

No one really gives two shits whether or not you’re willing to date her. Because she doesn’t want to date you. Because you’re a petulant asshole with no empathy for other people. And that makes you pretty damn “risky” as a romantic partner.

H/T — r/TheBluePill

 

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

204 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
rugbyyogi
rugbyyogi
5 years ago

@wwth – yeah, plus women are more likely to seek help with mental unwellness, so they may actually be diagnosed, which can often be used against them. My ex was a big fan of telling me I had ‘mental problems’ if I ever raised an issue – it was part of his pattern of abuse.

And, of course, I do have ‘mental problems’ – namely depression and anxiety, which have sometimes contributed to me behaving in ways I’m not proud of – but these have mainly been self-harming including ongoing unhealthy addictions to nicotine and food (and caffeine, but I don’t care!). But it also contributed to me not being able to extricate myself from an abusive relationship, which might be partly ‘being en-fugged’ but might be self-harm, too.

The funny thing is, he’s been diagnosed, too with the exact same mental health disorders (and one I think he has but is undiagnosed with), but I didn’t use that against him (once, just once, and I feel bad about it.) Of course, he didn’t continue with treatment. Plus he IS an asshole – which is always a heady relationship cocktail.


As to the original post – yep – such logic. I’m sure it probably stems from seeing somebody saying men shouldn’t date a rape victim (I think David has highlighted such vicious blather here before) and someone else saying “That’s messed up, dude.” Saying that blanket advice against dating rape victims is messed up isn’t actually saying that anyone must or should date rape victims. I mean seeking out a rape victim to date as his/her defining characteristic sounds skeevy as hell.

mildlymagnificent
mildlymagnificent
5 years ago

I really doubt that most child molesters are clinical pedophiles anyway. It’s more likely they get off on power and control.

Yep. When you read the famous Meet The Predators post you can be so surprised or otherwise taken aback that rapists admit to their behaviour that you miss the follow on.

Lisak & Miller also answered their other question: are rapists responsible for more violence generally? Yes. The surveys covered other violent acts, such as slapping or choking an intimate partner, physically or sexually abusing a child, and sexual assaults other than attempted or completed rapes …
If we could eliminate the men who rape again and again and again, a quarter of the violence against women and children would disappear .

https://yesmeansyesblog.wordpress.com/2009/11/12/meet-the-predators/

So that strongly suggests that dominating the vulnerable is a big driver for a significant minority (4% to 8%) of men who engage in several kinds of physical and sexual violence against both women and children rather than an immutable, I-can’t-help-it sexual drive. That’s not to say that there aren’t people who are exclusively sexually attracted to children, but I’d be surprised if they number anywhere nearly as many as 4%.

soloses
soloses
5 years ago

Ah, yes, because pedophiles, the scum of the earth, are totally comparable to rape victims.

Wait. No, they’re not. God, but that guy is an absolute shithead.

Lea
Lea
5 years ago

Why do these men think any woman wants them anyway. I’m too good for them. Yea, fat single moms with issues are too good for them. Who isn’t?
Not even for a cheap thrill. It isn’t as if any of them has ever described sex in such a way that didn’t make it sound like sex with them is a waste of time at best and abusive at worst. They’re incapable of partnering with their fellow Misogynists. Who do they get on with? Their lives sound bleak and full of regret and rage. They describe their lovers and kids like objects that exist for their pleasure or pride alone.
There is nothing, from their hate for women to their internalized fear of being found less than “alpha” that makes dating a Manureospherean sound like something anyone would want to do.
Just…yuck.

Alan Robertshaw
5 years ago

Re: prison rape

People have addressed the issue really well.

The one thing I’ll add is that you can probably discern something about attitudes regarding the domination motive and misogyny by considering that the standard prison threat in this regard is: “I’m going to make you my bitch”.

mrex
mrex
5 years ago

I’m extremely disappointed by people who refer to pedophiles as “potential predators”. Being attracted to children =/= actually raping children. At least some pedophiles never act on their urges, as they realize that their urges are always harmful to other people. It’s no different than any other mental disorder/illness, in that people have choices in how to manage their behaviors and their symptoms. No surprise that the pedophiles that do rape turn out to be assholes and allergic to responsibility.

I don’t know what the OP is going on about with “being forced” to date the mentally ill/rape victims, but it seems that OP may have had a point. If we, as feminists, want to be supportive of mental illnesses then we need to be supportive of *ALL* mental illnesses. The idea that the mentally ill are *inherently* violent is bad, correct?

(Certain personality disorders are the only exceptions as the diagnostic criteria are such that these PDs are *inherently* harmful. As soon as someone with APD stops acting in antisocial ways they no longer fit the bill as having APD, right?)

RE: BPD.

1. Trauma may play a role in BPD but not everyone with BPD has been raped/traumatized.

It’s also possible that, as a disorder that is associated with impulsive, risky behavior, suffers of BPD are more likely to put themselves in risky situations and as a consequence be victims of violence. **Now, I’m in no way excusing rape and abuse, or victim blaming.** Victims are *never* to blame. All I’m saying is that some situations are more risky than others, and BPD causes risky behavior, so a high *correlation* between BPD and trauma does not mean that trauma *causes* BPD.

Which is my long ass way of saying that science has no fuming clue what BPD is or what causes it. There’s no more evidence that rape or trauma causes BPD than cutting or suicide does.

2. I believe that there is much gender bias in diagnosing Cluster Bs. This probably leads to tons of misdiagnosis of women as BPD when there’s something else partially or completely play. Which is probably the root cause of about 90% of the stories out there of those abusive, cruel, women with BPD.

Actually, diagnosing (and treating) Personality Disorders outside of jail is in general a shit-shoot. There’s tons of bias and discrimination against cluster Bs that exists among mental health “professionals”. >< In addition, many mental health professionals are reluctant to diagnose a personality disorder in fear of the patient experiencing discrimination and are more likely to diagnose/misdiagnose PDs as sufferering solely from mood disorders such as Panic Disorder or Bipolar.

Mattie
Mattie
5 years ago

It’s also really fucked up to compare people with depression, self-harm, addiction, BPD, or other mental illnesses to child molesters, especially given the rate at which mentally ill people are at risk of sexual abuse, from childhood in some cases, versus abled people.

(Ducks head as a bunch of people decide to respond with their horror stories of dating someone with BPD or even unipolar depression, or anything else, as frequently happens on threads.)

mrex
mrex
5 years ago

” There’s no more evidence that rape or trauma causes BPD than cutting or suicide does.”

I should have edited this out. It’s not making the correlation =/= causation point I was going for and sounds like I’m saying that BPD causes rape/abuse, which just No.

Apologies.

“It’s also really fucked up to compare people with depression, self-harm, addiction, BPD, or other mental illnesses to child molesters, especially given the rate at which mentally ill people are at risk of sexual abuse, from childhood in some cases, versus abled people”

Agree. But its also not fair to conflate child molesters and pedophiles who resist acting on their urges as well. 🙂

History Nerd
History Nerd
5 years ago

I’d guess most pedophiles wouldn’t act on their urges. Child molesters have control needs and major empathy deficit whether they’re diagnosable pedophiles or not. Most people can control their sexual urges and avoid hurting someone.

Still, I think it’s reasonable to prevent pedophiles from working with children.

mrex
mrex
5 years ago

I can see your point because children are inherently less powerful, and it seems that it would be a painful and frustrating position to be in for the pedophile as well. However, I still think the idea is still more harmful than helpful, in that it creates an atmosphere where people with a certain sexual orientation are presumed to be rapists.

[Edit]I have daughters. I’m much more concerned that the “normal” people that have a hidden past of acting violently will rape my girls.

History Nerd
History Nerd
5 years ago

Most child predators are attracted to adult women also. I don’t think the offending is primarily about sexual pleasure.

Serial rapists get more sexual pleasure out of enthusiastic consensual sex with a woman than rape.

Marshall
Marshall
5 years ago

He is not equating rape victims to pedophiles, but explaining why you wouldn’t want to date either. Pedophiles don’t have a choice on who they are attracted to, they are broken people, just like rape victims. That’s not to say rape victims are as bad as them.

Of course a better comparison would be a rape victim and a military vet with severe PTSD, but it’s the same point in any case.

mrex
mrex
5 years ago

@History Nerd

I’m not sure what you’re going for here. Pedophiles, by definition, are people who *ARE* sexually attracted to and could theoretically receive sexual pleasure from “consensual” sex with children. It *is* a sexual orientation. It’s the “consent” part that takes away sexual pleasure. Generally only sadists take sexual pleasure in rape.

History Nerd
History Nerd
5 years ago

Most “consensual” sex with children involves grooming. Kids aren’t sitting around thinking about having sex with an adult. So the offending behavior will never be like enthusiastic consent.

Offenders who are exclusively interested in prepubescent children are rare.

mrex
mrex
5 years ago

“Most “consensual” sex with children involves grooming. Kids aren’t sitting around thinking about having sex with an adult. So the offending behavior will never be like enthusiastic consent.”

No kidding it’s not like enthusiastic consent, it’s rape, hence the scare quotes around “consensual”. If you have a point, make it. You seem to be saying that pedophiles aren’t sexually attracted to children, or that most offenders aren’t pedophiles, or actually I have no clue where you’re going with this.

We really don’t know much about pedophilia because most of the research has been done on sexual offenders, whom are different in at least one way from non-offenders . Yes, at least a portion of pedophiles are sexually attracted to adults as well.

Orion
Orion
5 years ago

I’m 100% convinced that we need a new (dare I say more complex?) diagnostic category for the effects of abuse and trauma. Clinical PTSD is a very specific and narrow model, when we know that trauma, and more commonly, abuse which does not qualify as clinical trauma, affect people in profound ways which aren’t part of the PTSD model. Then we end up treating survivors for depression or anxiety or Borderline, and medicalizing or essentializing the effects of abuse.

So I would love to see “Complex PTSD” go in. Should it replace Borderline?

Well, I would love to get rid of Borderline. I’ve never seen much value in it as a model, but I’m a layperson, so maybe it has some value to theory that I don’t know enough to recognize. I don’t really care though, because in reality I’ve seen too many professionals invoke “Borderline” to justify apathy or malpractice.

I’d like to both add c-PTSD and remove Borderline, so I guess you could say I want one to replace the other? I wouldn’t put it that way myself, because that would imply that we discovered Borderline was “really” a post-traumatic syndrome, while I tend to think that Borderline isn’t “really” anything.

guest
guest
5 years ago

‘(Banana slugs for the win!)’

🙂 my sister went there!

mrex
mrex
5 years ago

@Orion

“Clinical PTSD is a very specific and narrow model, when we know that trauma, and more commonly, abuse which does not qualify as clinical trauma, affect people in profound ways which aren’t part of the PTSD model. Then we end up treating survivors for depression or anxiety or Borderline, and medicalizing or essentializing the effects of abuse.”

I’m 100% in agreement here.

Antedoctal story; I don’t know why, but it seems to me that professionals are “resigned” to crappy shit happening in the environment and underestimate the effects of abuse. I found that most my therapists threw medication at me, and refused to acknowledge that maybe all the bad shit going on around me was a source of my problems.

One actually told me that people would stop mistreating me if I took medication. I mean, yes I understand that one small change has the potential to change the entire environment, but seriously, fuck no. I may have serious problems, but others are still responsible for their choices, including their choices to lie, abuse, and manipulate. They routinely lied and manipulated because their manipulative assholes, not because I’m mentally ill. FFS.

“I’d like to both add c-PTSD and remove Borderline, so I guess you could say I want one to replace the other? I wouldn’t put it that way myself, because that would imply that we discovered Borderline was “really” a post-traumatic syndrome, while I tend to think that Borderline isn’t “really” anything.

This is where you went downhill. BPD most definitely exists. I know some people blame it all on childhood trauma, but they’re wrong. I would really like to know how the fuck these people explain the 75% of people with BPD that never experienced “severe” childhood trauma, or the third that experienced none at all?

I was going to stay out of this thread for a while as I’m sure people are sick if seeing my face, but I’m just about bleeding from the ears with rage right now.

mrex
mrex
5 years ago

Haha I suck at typing and editing.

NetNrrd
NetNrrd
5 years ago

“Date a pedophile? Oh, I couldn’t – I’m much too old for him!”

Orion
Orion
5 years ago

Mrex, I’m neither a professional nor an expert, so I have to concede that it’s possible there’s a core group of what you might call “primary Borderline” people out there who tick all the boxes without either an abuse history OR an organic disorder to explain them. There may be.

If they do exist, actual working psychologists are rubbish at identifying them and rubbish at supporting them. Someone in this thread asserted that BPD is treatable, and I learned today that DBT was developed for BPD patients and then adapted for post-traumatic patients (I thought it was the other way around) Most psychologists in America don’t seem to have gotten the memo. All of my friends who were told they had Borderline were also told that it was untreatable. Working clinicians are using it as professional code for “fuck if I know” plus “I’m sick of dealing with you.”

Also, it’s really weird that BPD is treatable, because the common wisdom (among psychologist) has long been that personality disorders are untreatable. I see some writers now saying that it turns out this was a mistake, and we’re discovering that personality disorders can be treated — but the example they give always turns out to be BPD. If Borderline is responsive to treatment in the way other personality disorders are not, then maybe it doesn’t belong in that class.

The people I’ve known who were diagnosed with Borderline have all had the same story. They started having problems and got an initial diagnosis — depression or anxiety or bi-polar or psychosis or PTSD. They entered some kind of treatment, but their lives continued to fall apart. Eventually at their lowest point they were diagnosed with co-morbid Borderline to explain why treatment for the other disorder wouldn’t take. Then they tread water; the Borderline label didn’t help them get better, it just explained why they weren’t getting better. Eventually they discovered another problem — bi-polar, abuse history, narcolepsy, etc.. Only once they get treatment for that problem did they start getting better.

I tend to think that all or at least most of what appear to be Borderline cases are better-understood as people who have unusual combinations of other disorders or circumstances.

dust bunny
dust bunny
5 years ago

On BPD:

I’m going to defend BPD. The notorious aspects of BPD are just the ones that need to be addressed by mental health professionals before a sufferer can fully benefit from help. I’ve heard universal praise for dialectical behavior therapy from people who had previously gone through a series of ineffective treatments for under some other diagnosis.

To me BPD seems to correspond to an actual, existing need. The people I know who have it were relieved when they finally arrived at the diagnosis after being treated as bipolars, panic disorder cases or whatnot.

It would be nice if something could be done about the stigma associated with BPD. But not at the cost of treating it effectively. The needs of a typical PTSD sufferer seem to me to be very different from the needs of a typical BPD sufferer.

On sexism in mental health diagnoses:

Men and women’s life histories and experiences are different and their choices and behaviors are differently restricted. This can easily lead to symptoms and illnesses that are different. I’m entirely willing to believe that women tend to get BPD or histrionic PD when men tend to get something else. Maybe a sexist diagnosis isn’t so much sexist itself, as it is diagnosing outcomes of sexism at large.

This isn’t to say that sexism in the practice of diagnosing isn’t something that needs to be addressed, or that it’s necessarily a good idea to classify a similar disorder differently based on its typical manifestation in each gender. I’m agnostic on the latter.

History Nerd
History Nerd
5 years ago

BPD is probably valid, but it’s notorious as a go-to diagnosis for a woman the therapist thinks is a “[ableist slur] [sexist slur]” (or “difficult” as a euphemism for that). It’s treatable and a lot of people can be helped with DBT.

Complex PTSD probably should be in the DSM. Therapists can be insensitive to people who’ve had certain traumatic experiences that aren’t normally viewed as “real” trauma.

History Nerd
History Nerd
5 years ago

A few psychologists and lawyers have also made the claim that BPD sufferers frequently make false abuse accusations. (sarcasm) So yeah, score one for the human race. (end sarcasm)

Jenora Feuer
Jenora Feuer
5 years ago

@Alan:
I hadn’t heard about the Cod wars, but I certainly remember the Turbot War of the mid-1990s where Canada seized a Spanish trawler that had been fishing off the Grand Banks of Newfoundland. Things briefly got hotter after the French seized a Cornish fishing boat that had been flying a Canadian flag in support of Canada’s position on the matter.

That, of course, was already after the Northern cod stocks had collapsed (in 1992), and my understanding is that Canada at least has had a moratorium on cod fishing since then. It’s been over 20 years already, and the stocks haven’t shown any signs of replenishing yet.

leftwingfox
leftwingfox
5 years ago

sbel: Yeah, I completely fucked that up. I thought the original author of this bullshit was using “pedophile” to refer to an active child molester, so I wound up conflating “people with an attraction” and “people who rape” instead of them.

Alan Robertshaw
5 years ago

@ jenora

Over fishing is perhaps a bigger problem than most people realise. I think it’s a real possibility that in a century there’ll be some fish that will only exist if we clone them.

I was involved in representing the Cornish fishing fleet in a “black fishing” case a few years back (that’s where you identify species that’s subject to quota as a different fish). As a result I ended up spending a lot of time looking at material from ICES (that’s the body that advises on fish quotas). The reports make surprising, and slightly worrying, reading.

TW for another anecdote

I was lamenting with the DEFRA lawyer that I’d never heard of half the fish involved in the case (seriously, what is a ‘Ling’ anyway?). He subsequently sent me a fish identification chart with the annotation “You might want to get your clients to look at this as well :-)”

sparkalipoo
sparkalipoo
5 years ago

@mrex

I really don’t get how it’s dangerous to say that pedophiles shouldn’t work around children because the difference between being a pedophile and other sexual orientations is that they are sexually attracted to people who CAN’T consent — I don’t see how see how saying that people who have the impulse to have sex with (molest) children, shouldn’t be around children is a problem or any different than saying an alcoholic shouldn’t drink

I’m not sure what you’re going for here. Pedophiles, by definition, are people who *ARE* sexually attracted to and could theoretically receive sexual pleasure from “consensual” sex with children. It *is* a sexual orientation. It’s the “consent” part that takes away sexual pleasure. Generally only sadists take sexual pleasure in rape.

and this is just really wrong, because I think the idea that rapists are sadists or somehow inhuman monsters only hurts rape victims because it allows people to reject the rape victims accusations on the grounds that “rapists are pure evil and he’s not pure evil, so therefor he can’t be a rapist” and also leads to the phenomenon where rapists will readily admit to being raping only as long as the things that they did aren’t labeled as rape–I was told by my rapist that he wasn’t the type of guy who would rape someone

you also seem to be arguing that pedophiles never molest children and that’s not true (that’s not to say that all pedophiles molest children)

Also, for me at least, saying “consensual sex with children” has a certain eww factor with scare quotes or not because statutory rape is often dismissed as not as not as bad as other types of rape because it is assumed that the child somehow wanted it and I’m guessing that’s what’s history nerd was thinking about too

finally, pedophilia is NOT a sexual orientation, it doesn’t fit the definition (children are people of a certain age group and not a gender) and the DSM defines it as a disorder and I also don’t think that labeling pedophilia as a sexual orientation is helpful to non-offending pedophiles because the non-offending pedophiles I’ve heard of tend to want to be able to receive treatment for their disorder and the “pedophilia is really just another sexual orientation” thing has always striked me as a well meaning but misguided idea that gets abused really really easily

Jenora Feuer
Jenora Feuer
5 years ago

@Alan:
Oh, believe me, anybody in Eastern Canada knows how big a problem overfishing is. Fishing was one of the mainstays of the region, so when the cod stocks collapsed, so did the Newfoundland and Labrador economy.

As for the ‘black fishing’, well, that of course is also part of the problem. So were the Spanish ships that deliberately went out to trawl through any regions they had access to so they could grab anything they could. So were the French ships that made use of St. Pierre and Miquelon. So were the ships that would deliberately set up in international waters just outside of the Exclusive Economic Zone and trawl the migrating fish before they could get into anybody else’s local waters. It’s all been a ‘Tragedy of the Commons’ writ large where, as things collapsed, everybody scrambled to get everything they could before it was gone, and thus accelerated the collapse.

(And I’m not absolving Canada of this: after the Exclusive Economic Zone idea became de facto policy, Canada made use of the improved fishing it got by pushing out the foreign fleets to expand our own quotas before realizing just how dire things were. And then, of course, no politician wanted to tell people that they couldn’t make a living by fishing when they’d done so for generations, so nobody was willing to do anything about it until the whole thing fell apart completely.)

weirwoodtreehugger
5 years ago

He is not equating rape victims to pedophiles, but explaining why you wouldn’t want to date either. Pedophiles don’t have a choice on who they are attracted to, they are broken people, just like rape victims. That’s not to say rape victims are as bad as them.

So much wrong here. Rape survivors are not broken people. A lot of the people you know, perfectly normal people are rape survivors and you’d never know it unless they told you.

And okay, you think rape victims aren’t as bad as pedophiles. Well, just how bad do you think they are, then?

Wtf?

weirwoodtreehugger
5 years ago

finally, pedophilia is NOT a sexual orientation, it doesn’t fit the definition (children are people of a certain age group and not a gender) and the DSM defines it as a disorder and I also don’t think that labeling pedophilia as a sexual orientation is helpful to non-offending pedophiles because the non-offending pedophiles I’ve heard of tend to want to be able to receive treatment for their disorder and the “pedophilia is really just another sexual orientation” thing has always striked me as a well meaning but misguided idea that gets abused really really easily

Calling pedophilia a sexual orientation also doesn’t do much help to combat the harmful stereotype that gay men are likely to be child molesters. Sure, straight is as much of an orientation as gay is, but when people hear the phrase “sexual orientation” gay people come to mind.

Lea
Lea
5 years ago

Ever get the hunch these guys just don’t want to see anyone else happy, ever?

Their advice couldn’t be worse if they were trying to sabotage other men’s potential happiness.

Alan Robertshaw
5 years ago

@ lea

Although the ‘relationship advice’ theses chaps give is universally terrible, I don’t think they’re trying to sabotage other people’s happiness. I don’t think this is seriously meant as advice at all.

Since learning more about MRAs I’m of the firm opinion that their *sole* raison d’être is to harass, demean and terrify women.

That original article isn’t aimed at men at all. Their male fans will of course see it, but the only thing they get out of it is a vicarious thrill at seeing their heroes demean women. It’s women that they are targeting.

The sole purpose of the article is to abuse rape victims by saying “you are on a par with paedophiles” and then have a laugh at the hurt they hope to cause by that.

Lea
Lea
5 years ago

Alan,
That makes sense.

Alan Robertshaw
5 years ago

@ lea

Well, law of averages, I was bound to get something right one day 🙂

I think a lot of the MRA output is aimed at women. It’s part of their campaign of harassment generally. That’s why they post these things on public boards rather than, say, having a secret cabal where they just communicate with their own kind.

They want women to see this. They hope it will upset them.

It’s one of the reasons MGTOWs never actually “go” but instead constantly intrude in spaces women hang out.

Imagine that all women suddenly emigrated to Mars so men had the whole Earth to themselves.

Do you think all the MGTOWs and MRAs would rejoice that they had finally gained the paradise they sought; or do you think it’s more likely they’d shout “Come back! We haven’t got anyone we can threaten to rape now!”?

mildlymagnificent
mildlymagnificent
5 years ago
mrex
mrex
5 years ago

“finally, pedophilia is NOT a sexual orientation, it doesn’t fit the definition”

It isn’t if you consider the definition of “sexual orientation” as “what gender you are sexually attracted to”, but that definition also leaves off asexuality and sometimes even pansexuality. There’s another legitimate definition of sexual orientation that is “the primary group that you’re sexually stimulated by,(or not)”, and that would include not just pedophilia but also asexuality. Yes, in studies pedophiles are primarily stimulated by explicit stories of children (as measured by sexual response), and usually have a gender preference as well, just like normal adults. Pedophiles are often romantically oriented to children as well.

Basically, human sexuality is more complex than the “everyone wants it, and the only difference is whether you want it with men or women or both” definition that is usually used.

Pedophilia is listed as a paraphilia in the DSM because it’s distressing and harmful to the sufferer, and because there is no harmless, consensual expression of it. That doesn’t mean it can’t be a sexual orientation. Remember, homosexuality was (wrongly) listed as a paraphilia in DSM1, that didn’t stop it from being a “sexual orientation” then either. Two seperate things.

Kinks are thought to be learned. Mounting evidence is showing that pedophilia is innate and a certain percent of people are simply born with it.

“offending pedophiles I’ve heard of tend to want to be able to receive treatment for their disorder and the “pedophilia is really just another sexual orientation” thing has always striked me as a well meaning but misguided idea that gets abused really really easily”

Again being a “sexual orientation” does not mean it is not a mental disorder. It causes significant suffering. No-one here is suggesting that it’s OK to sleep with children. This isn’t NAMBLA.

There is little to no help available for pedophiles in the US outside of jail due to manditory reporting laws. Even if a child is not *actually* being harmed, manditory reporters (ie. All health professionals) still have to report the pedophile if he “could” hurt a child. I think the criminalization of a mental disorder puts much more of a damper on getting help than considering it a “sexual orientation” does.

“Also, for me at least, saying “consensual sex with children” has a certain eww factor with scare quotes or not”.

Uh, it should have a huge “ewwww” factor; it’s child rape . The scare quotes were to acknowledge the “ewwwwww” factor, not to make light of it.

Basically, pedophiles are set up to desire something that can’t exist; “consensual” sex with a child. Some go into denial of this (hey NAMBLA), some are just rapist assholes, and some are neither and can live lonely lives due to the cards nature handed them. The ones that have the best chance are attracted to adults as well, since they have a healthy outlet to explore their sexuality, rather than having to learn how to completely suppress it.

@ spark

“I don’t see how see how saying that people who have the impulse to have sex with (molest) children, shouldn’t be around children is a problem or any different than saying an alcoholic shouldn’t drink

1. Because it implies that pedophiles are basically rape machines that can’t help themselves but rape, which is an argument that is *always wrong*. I mean, the “I just can’t help myself because I have needs “, excuse being bullshit is feminism 101, and it doesn’t get any better just because we’re talking about child rape.

“But jailed child rapists almost always rape again”, I hear someone cry. Why yes, the operative word being rapist . Rapists almost always rape again. Rapists always look to avoid responsibly with a “I just can’t help it” excuse. It’s all bullshit. All of it. Appyling it as a blanket to a marginalized group of the mentally ill is not OK.

Judge based on behavior. Not on diagnosis.

2. Many, if not most, child rapists are not pedophiles . Which is why I’m more worried about my kids being around “normal” people that have a hidden history of sexual violence than being around a hidden pedophile. A hidden sexual assailant could rape my child despite not being sexually attracted, a hidden pedophile that was not a rapist would not.

3. I think it’s very understandable to want to ban *all* pedophiles from working with children. Truth is, I would be uncomfortable myself. Hey, I can still be biased, and suffer from rape myths.

“you also seem to be arguing that pedophiles never molest children and that’s not true (that’s not to say that all pedophiles molest children)”

LOL, where did I say that? I actually don’t think that there is a single group on the planet in which *someone* hasn’t molested children. So never ? Hahaha, yeah no.

What I did say is that we don’t know much about pedophilia, including how common it is outside of offenders, and consequently what percent of pedophiles offend. It could be 99%, or it could be 1%.

We can guess is that it’s high percent, but it’s at best an educated guess, as we don’t have many facts due to it being hidden from view. Since most guesses as to how many offend seem to be biased filled wild conjecture, so yeah, I may not take them very seriously.

Blame it on pedophilia being a “hidden” disease outside of jail.

“and this is just really wrong, because I think the idea that rapists are sadists or somehow inhuman monsters

Uh, please tell me you’re not calling sadists “inhuman monsters?”

You woefully missed the point. Most rapists don’t sexually enjoy rape. Sadist do. Ergo, most rapists are not sadists.

Although, most sadists don’t rape, either. :/

@WWTH

“Sure, straight is as much of an orientation as gay is, but when people hear the phrase “sexual orientation” gay people come to mind.”.

Hay, straight privilege, waddup?

This isn’t aimed at you, WWTH. People be stupid.

weirwoodtreehugger
5 years ago

Remember, homosexuality was (wrongly) listed as a paraphilia in DSM1, that didn’t stop it from being a “sexual orientation” then either. Two seperate things.

Don’t do that. I agree that non-offending pedophiles shouldn’t be automatically loathed because that creates an environment where they don’t feel safe seeking treatment, making them more likely to give in and offend. But that can be said without making this kind of false equivalence. This comparison harms gay people because it plays right into homophobic stereotypes that have frequently been used as justifications to deny rights to gay people. The reason it was wrong to have homosexuality in the DSM is that being gay isn’t disordered. It doesn’t harm the person who is gay and it doesn’t harm the people around them (as long as consent is observed, of course). That’s the difference between a sexual orientation and a disorder.

mrex
mrex
5 years ago

I’ve actually done research and had my mind changes on this due to arguments with MRAs (?) because I’m concerned with bias against the mentally ill. It’s not just pedophiles, there was a case where a young man seeking help for sexual obsessions due to OCD got ratted out to the police as a “potential threat” by his therapist. It makes my ears bleed.

Anyway, here’s a good article I read a while back. It gets a trigger warning because the man that they interviewed for buying child porn is pretty gross.

Many researchers taking a different view of pedophilia

Pedophilia once was thought to stem from psychological influences early in life. Now, many experts view it as a deep-rooted predisposition that does not change.

As a young boy, Paul Christiano loved the world of girls — the way they danced, how their spindly bodies tumbled in gymnastics.

In adolescence, as other boys ogled classmates, he was troubled to find himself fantasizing about 7- to 11-year-olds.

His desires remained stuck in time as he neared adulthood. Despite a stable home life in suburban Chicago, he was tortured by urges he knew could land him in prison.

“For having these feelings, I was destined to become a monster,” he said. “I was terrified.”

In 1999, Christiano was caught buying child pornography. Now 36, he said he has never molested a child, but after five years of state-ordered therapy, the attraction remains.

These people felt they could snuff out the desire, or shame me into denying it existed,” he said. “But it’s as intrinsic as the next person’s heterosexuality.”

In the laboratory, researchers are coming to the same conclusion.

Like many forms of sexual deviance, pedophilia once was thought to stem from psychological influences early in life. Now, many experts view it as a sexual orientation as immutable as heterosexuality or homosexuality. It is a deep-rooted predisposition — limited almost entirely to men — that becomes clear during puberty and does not change.

The best estimates are that between 1% and 5% of men are pedophiles, meaning that they have a dominant attraction to prepubescent children.

Not all pedophiles molest children. Nor are all child molesters pedophiles. Studies show that about half of all molesters are not sexually attracted to their victims. They often have personality disorders or violent streaks, and their victims are typically family members.

By contrast, pedophiles tend to think of children as romantic partners and look beyond immediate relatives. They include chronic abusers familiar from the headlines — Catholic priests, coaches and generations of Boy Scout leaders.

Other pedophiles are “good people who are struggling,” said Dr. Fred Berlin, a psychiatrist who heads the Johns Hopkins Sexual Behaviors Consultation Unit. “They’re tortured souls fighting like heck not to do this. We do virtually nothing in terms of reaching out to these folks. We drive it underground.”

Studying criminals

Some of the new understanding of pedophilia comes from studies done on convicted sex criminals at the Center for Mental Health and Addiction in Toronto, where researchers use a procedure known as phallometry to identify men whose peak attraction is to children.

A man sits alone in a room viewing a series of images and listening to descriptions of various sexual acts with adults and children, male and female, while wearing a device that monitors blood flow to his penis.

Like men attracted to adults, nearly all pedophiles respond most strongly to one gender or the other — females far more often than males.

In searching for causes of pedophilia, researchers have largely dismissed the popular belief that abuse in childhood plays an important role. Studies show that few victims grow up to be abusers, and only about a third of offenders say they were molested.

Scientists at the Toronto center have uncovered a series of associations that suggest pedophilia has biological roots.

Among the most compelling findings is that 30% of pedophiles are left-handed or ambidextrous, triple the general rate. Because hand dominance is established through some combination of genetics and the environment of the womb, scientists see that association as a powerful indicator that something is different about pedophiles at birth.

“The only explanation is a physiological one,” said James Cantor, a leader of the research.

Researchers have also determined that pedophiles are nearly an inch shorter on average than non-pedophiles and lag behind the average IQ by 10 points — discoveries that are consistent with developmental problems, whether before birth or in childhood.

Read the Rest

TinyAntsGoingToEatMe
TinyAntsGoingToEatMe
5 years ago

Pedophilia is absolutely not an orientation. It is strictly a paraphilla. It is not a valid sexuality, and it is delusional due to the inability of children to give consent. An “orientation,” both medically and colloquially, implies a valid sexuality that can be practiced healthily. In the same way , necrophilia is not an “orientation.” It is, frankly, from both a medical and social standpoint, absurd to claim as such.

The other more technical aspect of pedopilia that shows it is not just an unhealthy variation of sexuality, is that like most paraphilias, it has compulsive aspects to it. The desire to indulge in acts of sexual violence grows stronger when fantasies and Proto behaviors are indulged. This is not seen as a major pattern in sexual orientations (I.e, engaging in sexual activity does not make people become obsessive). This comes from the current knowledge base of therapists who specialize in paraphilias.

I’m very tired of seeing pedopilia touted as a sexual orientation. It is factually incorrect, and only undermines the severity and potential consequences of the disorder. I also believe that in the case of most ( if not all) child molesters, it is not a matter of “being unable to control themselves,” but either a willful or intrinsic blindness to empathy and reality.

mrex
mrex
5 years ago

@WWTH

” The reason it was wrong to have homosexuality in the DSM is that being gay isn’t disordered”

I couldn’t agree more.

My point was that it was still considered a “sexual orientation” even when it was (wrongly) considered disordered, , so the words are not exactly mutually exclusive.

I get that you don’t want to associate homosexuality with the word “disorder” through even the most tortured logic. I’m still a fan of pushing to change the cultural definition of “sexual orientation” anyway. This isn’t really about pedophilia, and whether or not it’s “disordered”, for me. I would like “sexual orientation” to include asexuality and all forms of primary sexual identity. 🙂

mrex
mrex
5 years ago

I screwed up a deleted the bottom of the first page if anyone’s wondering why the linked page makes no sense.

weirwoodtreehugger
5 years ago

It’s not tortured. You used homosexuality being in the DSM in the past as a reason that pedophilia should be considered an orientation. Just please stop.

mrex
mrex
5 years ago

@WWTH

“It’s not tortured. You used homosexuality being in the DSM in the past as a reason that pedophilia should be considered an orientation. Just please stop.”

If that’s what you took, then fuck me, because that’s not what I meant. I would smack myself and put myself in the naughty corner for internalized homophobia if I meant that. My bad.

What I meant to say was that “being a sexual orientation” and “being a disorder” are two completely separate things. It’s possible to be both, or one or the other.

Clearer?

sbel
sbel
5 years ago

@mrex,

Personally, I generally avoid calling pedophilia a sexual orientation purely because I know that a lot of homophobes like to link homosexuality and pedophilia, and I hate to make it easier for them.

Not saying that you’re linking the two, but like WWTH said,

…when people hear the phrase “sexual orientation” gay people come to mind.

mrex
mrex
5 years ago

@TinyAnts

“An “orientation,” both medically and colloquially, implies a valid sexuality that can be practiced healthily. In the same way , necrophilia is not an “orientation.” It is, frankly, from both a medical and social standpoint, absurd to claim as such.

If an “orientation” implies anything it implies something that is inherent, not learned, and cannot be changed with treatment. All three appear to be true of pedophilia, which is why treatment has shifted from trying to cure the urges, to teaching pedophiles how to manage them.

You guys add all kinds of shit into the definition of sexual orientation. Show me where a medical definition insists that a sexual orientation must be healthy .

I’ll give you something from Harvard Health Publications

“Consensus now exists that pedophilia is a distinct sexual orientation, not something that develops in someone who is homosexual or heterosexual. Some people with pedophilic urges are also attracted to adults, and may act only on the latter urges. Because people with pedophilic urges tend to be attracted to children of a particular gender, they are sometimes described in the literature as heterosexual, homosexual, or bisexual pedophiles. Roughly 9% to 40% of pedophiles are homosexual in their orientation toward children — but that is not the same as saying they are homosexual. Homosexual adults are no more likely than heterosexuals to abuse children.

Things are far from a consensus, but this paragraph probably illustrates why, as bisexual, I’m probably less offended for pedophilia to be it’s own sexual orientation. Pedophilia gets its own box, “homosexual” or “bisexual” pedophiles are not “homosexual” or “bisexual” in an adult orientation. (And I think sometimes they’re not). And “normal” homosexuals/bisexuals are not a paraphilia away from being “homosexual” pedophiles. There isn’t a over representation of “homosexual” pedophiles if it’s simply a different thing.

I don’t know much about necrophilia, but is it thought to be psychologically based and not biological/innate? Actually, glancing through the Wiki page, (I know), it seems that actual sexual attraction to corpses is only rarely a motivation.

“The other more technical aspect of pedopilia that shows it is not just an unhealthy variation of sexuality, is that like most paraphilias, it has compulsive aspects to it. The desire to indulge in acts of sexual violence grows stronger when fantasies and Proto behaviors are indulged. This is not seen as a major pattern in sexual orientations (I.e, engaging in sexual activity does not make people become obsessive).

Interesting. Citation?

Jamesworkshop
Jamesworkshop
5 years ago

I have a suspicion that they see rape primarily as being an offense against themselves, the possibility they might be romantical involved with a rape victim, is a bigger concern to them than the experiences of the victim.

Another worry is that devaluing is pretty much a cornerstone of abuse, a suggestion of a loss of status or respect for the victim is a tool rapists have used to control their targets, which brings to mind the fairly overt objectification found in the term “damaged goods”

Ddog
Ddog
5 years ago

@mrex please just fucking stop. All this arguing just smacks of apologetics and whether you used scare quotes or not you used the term enthusiastic consent. Also can I have some sources on most child molesters aren’t peadohiles or vice versa. Because strangely enough these assholes don’t usually admit it when confronted.

I don’t comment a lot here so don’t usually get into disagreements but fuck this. This isn’t a conversation where you’ll come out looking good judging by your comments so far

Octo
Octo
5 years ago

@Kat

And her constituents call her Mutti

That is usually not meant in a straight up positive way, more in an ironical one.

@weirwoodtreehugger

This comparison harms gay people because it plays right into homophobic stereotypes that have frequently been used as justifications to deny rights to gay people.

That says nothing about how true or not the definition is, though. I mean, what you say is a concern, of course, but surely in psychology, like any science, the primary concern should be what the theories, test results etc. say?

mrex
mrex
5 years ago

@Ddog

If you think I’m saying that legitimizing the emotions that are products of a mental disorder legitimizes actually committing harmful behavior, then you are deliberately misreading me. I explicitly said that sex with children is *always* rape. Rape is bad and harmful, no?

Just so we’re completely clear; rape and pictures of rape are always and unequivocally bad. There is no legitimate rape, and there is no legitimate child porn. BUUUT, feelings are not actions. We can legitimize people having emotions without legitimizing acting upon them.

I’m curious as to whether you extend your faulty logic to other mental disorders as well. For example, perhaps 15% of postpartum women experience intrusive thoughts of committing harm to their newborn babies. I was one if them. I got help when I went to Family Services because I believed that loosing her was an acceptable alternative to the possibility of hurting her, or of myself. Thank god that I got help instead of being told that I was a bad, violent person that shouldn’t be around children for having certain feelings. Although I think that postpartum illness/psychosis is *very* different from pedophilia, I can certainly relate to people who would view me as dangerous for nothing more than my thoughts. And I can relate to the idea that legitimizing postpartum disorders doesn’t legitimize child abuse or murder. Thoughts =/= actions.

We don’t know much about pedophiles that don’t commit crimes, or aren’t sex addicts. Because any pedophile is automatically treated as a de facto rapist the second they seek treatment, it’s not something they usually volunteer to do.

Which, at the very least, does not impress me as a way to reduce the odds of a pedophile abusing a child.

“Also can I have some sources on most child molesters aren’t peadohiles or vice versa. Because strangely enough these assholes don’t usually admit it when confronted.”

Are you honestly asking or are you just playing gotcha? They don’t just ask them; they use tests to measure sexual arousal to pedophilic situations. Not surprisingly, child rapists that aren’t pedophiles don’t respond sexually to depictions of pedophilia.

The article I quoted gave a summary of this. The idea that rape is usually about power and not sexual gratification is just feminism 101. If you want to have an honest discussion, I’ll spend more time here, but it seems pretty clear you don’t.

@Octo

“That says nothing about how true or not the definition is, though. I mean, what you say is a concern, of course, but surely in psychology, like any science, the primary concern should be what the theories, test results etc. say?

I think much of the problem is that people don’t agree on a definition of “sexual orientation” to begin with. Maybe categories such as “age orientation”, “gender orientation” and etc. would be better?

@Ddog ” This isn’t a conversation where you’ll come out looking good judging by your comments so far.”

Yeah I got that. Considering that I think the societal conversation needs to move on from “pedophiles are all potential rapists and monsters” for everyone’s sake, I don’t care.

But I think I’ve made my points and I’m bowing out if anyone wants to move on.