Pedophile-an adult with sexual interest in children- 15 is not an ADULT

[KittyWampus]

Here is the defintion of pedophile-

"an adult whose primary sexual interest is in children; SOME professionals make a differentiation between a pedophile, whose sexual partner of choice is a prepubertal child, and a hebephile, who is aroused by adolescents."

To those who really want to be know-it-alls:

Fine, you want to show everyone how smart you are... then use the word "hebephile". Noone will know what you mean except health professionals and latin professors.

But the rest of us will call Foley a Pedophile because that is the term in common usage for an adult who gets off sexually with children.

[aikoaiko]

1. Nothing wrong with exactitude. nt

[mcg]

2. yes there is. nt

[wakeme2008]

3. Right it is the 40 year difference in Ages that makes him a Pedo.

IMHO...

[Infomaniac]

4. Also called ephephelia nft.

[Beausoir]

5. I got chastised for claiming that a man having sex with a 12 year old

was a pedophile. Some DU attention-whoring moron chimed in to inform me that it was NOT pedophilia.

WTF? I don't get it.

Grown men...or women...having sex with children. Pedophilia. Case closed.

What kind of person would ever argue this point???

[karlrschneider]

25. I invite you to PM me with a link to that alleged post.

Or email
[e-mail]

[Beausoir]

53. Well..here ya go, baby.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=105&topic_id=5663741#5664049


Jesus. I can't believe I have to spend this much time explaining pedophilia to an alleged Liberal.

I'll try and break it down for you one more time. Older people who have sex with 12 year old children are B.A.D.

Can you understand that?

[karlrschneider]

55. You give me a link to a satirical post from the LOUNGE???

jesusfuckingchrist...

[Beausoir]

56. Umm.,,a 12 year old daughter of a DU'er was molested. Raped.

Charges were filed.

If that qualifies as satire to you...then our conversation is over.

You are sick.

[karlrschneider]

61. Nothing in RRR's post says anything about rape, OR 12 year old.

In fact she says "Yup. It's a criminal offense but it's not pedophilia."

And the story looks a little 'funny'...why would a woman with an 18 year old kid "accused" of
improper behaviour (by nobody, apparently, as yet at the time) show up at the door of the alleged
"victim" with him AND 2 other sons in tow?

:eyes: :eyes: :eyes:

[warrens]

83. There's a difference between 16 and 3 years old

A rather large difference, and using the same term to identify them is very nearly criminal itself. The law makes a rather large differentiation as well, as it should. If you think a 21-year-old having sex with a 16 year old is the same as a 21-year-old having sex with an infant...

[karlrschneider]

6. And obviously "the rest of you" know better than the professionals.

Except for "some". Like when the Bush cabal says "some say..."
Got it.

[moc]

10. I've been arguing with people all night who seem to think they know better

than the professionals.

My husband is a professional. He's a psychotherapist, clinical social worker, with 15 years experience working in the field, primarily with children/adolescents in therapeutic foster care settings.

He calls Mark Foley a pedophile. Yes, there's a technical difference between sexual attraction to a pre-pubescent vs. postpubescent minor, but the term for the latter is not commonly used by mental health professionals in their day to day discourse. They would call Foley a pedophile.

But multiple DUer's persist in claiming that my husband "doesn't know what he's talking about", that "it's just his opinion", that he's "not accurate". Of course, they're not basing this on anything more than their ability to search Wikipedia or cut-and-paste stuff from the DSV-IV. Yep, they know better than a professional with a decade and a half worth of experience.

:eyes:

[karlrschneider]

23. Sorry, I perceive your hubby to be one of the minority dissenters.

Maybe it would better if he were to use the keyboard and tell us directly what his professional diagnosis is. I assume he has more to work with than Frist did with the videotape of Terri Schiavo, right?

[moc]

30. Minority of what?

The plethora of mental health professionals on DU claiming they wouldn't refer to Foley as a pedophile?

The only other mental health professional I've seen post on the issue did indeed call Foley a pedophile.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=2276822&mesg_id=2276952

The only people I see declaring Foley wouldn't be referred to as a pedophile in the term's common usage haven't been mental health professionals.

And I'm sorry, but stating that a 52yo man who has a long history of sexual predation toward minors is a pedophile is quite a bit different than a cardiologist declaring a woman isn't brain dead based on a videotape.

[karlrschneider]

43. No, the plethora of professionals who define pedophilia.

I don't give any credence to a DU poster...anybody can pretend to be anybody...surely you aren't
gullible enough to believe every claim you read here?...are you? I have said for years here that I'm
an aeronautical engineer and a professional pilot for over 40 years - I don't expect anybody to
believe me but I've been perfectly willing to provide details and evidence to anyone who wants to
hear them. Independent confirmation...that sort of thing.

What exactly are the details of this "long history of...predation"? A collection of purported
instant-messaging logs and some emails? I am NOT defending anything he MIGHT have done, only the
principle of presumed innocence I thought DUers held sacrosanct. Maybe I've been wrong about that.

Sometimes I wonder how truly insular some DUers actually are...seemingly operating outside the sphere
of reality-based society we frequently cite as ideal...I have 16 year old neighbors who are more
worldly and sexually aware than I was at 25. I have a friend for some 30 years now who started
'hustling' outside gay bars in Tampa back in the 1970s. He made a lot of money and never thought
of it as anything but an easy way to make money. I told him way back then it was a crappy way to
run his life but he did it anyway. Sure that's bad but it's the way of things.

From my reading of the interchanges published, it escapes me how genuinely 'shocked' these boys really were, given their willingness to carry on the conversations and answer with clearly provocative replies. You think there's a 16 year old kid these days who doesn't recognize when somebody (of either gender) is 'coming on' to them? Woah.

[sandnsea]

47. My god, this IS NOT about the VICTIMS

It's about the PERPETRATOR. HE is the one with the fixation on underage males, PERIOD. Pages were warned as far back as 2001 to avoid him. How long had he been doing this BEFORE that to gain a reputation where kids would be warned about him?

This isn't about anecdotal stories about teen-agers. It's about FOLEY.

[karlrschneider]

50. Obviously, you are right. So far the evidence is that he talked dirty

to some boys who formerly worked for some of his colleagues. Many of whom apparently continued chatting with him and answering coquettishly. What penalty for doing that would be appropriate? Hey, I'm just
asking. I am NOT defending what he did...it was foul and sleazy but did it actually harm anyone?
Where and what is the balance? I'm not EVEN close to agreeing with some posters who think fighting
dirty (by whatever means) is justified simply because the wingnuts do it that way. Isn't it a DU
mantra that we support fairness, equality and ...the Geneva Convention?

[sandnsea]

57. It's illegal

Under federal law, minors are under 17. Pornography includes graphic descriptions. The minors in question were clearly lured into the situation, which is also illegal. There isn't a lot of question in this. That's why the FBI is involved. If no law had been broken, they'd know.

And I'm REALLY getting tired of this nonsense that nobody was harmed. The reason there is an age of consent at all is because young people don't always understand the long term consequences of their actions. That's why ADULTS are supposed to stay the hell away from them.

[karlrschneider]

65. Young people don't always understand the consequences...yeah

that's a lot of consolation to teenagers who are spending 10 years to life in prison for selling an ounce of pot. Got it.

[sandnsea]

67. I don't agree with that either

But I sure don't know what it's got to do with letting them be victims of sleezy old perverts.

[karlrschneider]

72. It's a difficult concept. Having to do with the fact that

society has no putative problem with recognizing sufficient maturity of teenagers to put them in
prison for perceived criminal activity but denies their ability to differentiate between innocent
social discoourse and overt sexual overtures.

Either they're too stupid or too smart..which is it?

[sandnsea]

78. 18 should be the only age

I don't agree with any of this trying kids as adults stuff, different sets of rules for different scenarios. But in any event, the difference is between whether the teen is the victim or the perpetrator. As a society, we've just decided we aren't going to give adults a pass on luring our teen-agers off into questionable relationships, prostitution, who knows what. So that we don't have to wonder whether the young person has been taken advantage of, we just put the responsibility on the adult to leave the young person alone. Foley grooming and stalking these boys makes it clear to me why we've got these laws.

[bettyellen]

80. so you disagree with the laws- and that's relevant to the rest of us how?

maybe you don't agree we need laws against powerful people who act as sexual predators, but many of us women would disagree with you. buddy. even with the laws on the books, it can suck to be a woman in the workplace. trust me, we've all put up with shit we shouldn''t have to just to put dinner on that table.

[Irreverend IX]

75. Fairness? This is war.

The right wing is trying to destroy the nation and everything it stands for. They want to trash the Constitution, force American workers into serfdom and poison the environment. Anyone who whimpers about fairness and equality is aiding and abetting the enemy. They must be driven from power at any cost.

Oh, and you're not sure he harmed anyone? I'm sure those boys were just "coquettishly" playing along--they weren't at all afraid to say no to such a powerful man so many years their senior. And I'm sure the memory of those incidents won't haunt them at all in the years to come.

[mongo]

82. Hmmmm....

He calls Mark Foley a pedophile. Yes, there's a technical difference between sexual attraction to a pre-pubescent vs. postpubescent minor, but the term for the latter is not commonly used by mental health professionals in their day to day discourse. They would call Foley a pedophile.

But multiple DUer's persist in claiming that my husband "doesn't know what he's talking about", that "it's just his opinion", that he's "not accurate". Of course, they're not basing this on anything more than their ability to search Wikipedia or cut-and-paste stuff from the DSV-IV. Yep, they know better than a professional with a decade and a half worth of experience.


Last time I checked, the DSM-IV and the American Psychiatric Assoc. WERE the experts in the matter.

Thanks for correcting me on that.

50% of all professionals graduate in the bottom half of their class too.

[EFerrari]

7. Only Democrats could be having this non argument argument.

lol

cryingshame is right. You can't get your message out unless you speak the vernacular.

[Garbo 2004]

16. I remember when the term was "chicken hawk" although that likely

won't register with many folks now that it's taken on another, nonsexual, connotation.

[sandnsea]

29. Until the right wing picks up on it

And uses it to confuse the issue. Every adult male I know knows that you don't go after teen-agers. It's so not complicated, I don't understand the motivation of DUers who want to pretend it is.

[Ediacara]

8. Pardon me, but 16 is not a "child"

Paedophilia is sexual interest in children. Sixteen is not a child. Paedophile is a completely inaccurate and inappropriate term for Foley. Period.

That's not to say that what Foley has done is ok. He made apparently unwanted sexual advances toward a minor (or several minors) and abused his position of power as a US Congressman. That is completely unacceptable gay or straight, man or woman.

Even if the page had been 18, Foley's actions amount to sexual harassment and a hostile working environment. But they don't amount to paedophilia.

[mcg]

9. 16 is a child, the word child has multiple meanings.

So now you polically correct nicey nice language police want to dictate what the word child must mean.

Do a google search on "16 year old child" and then tell me that child is never used to describe a 16 year old.

[Ediacara]

15. Politically correct nicey nice police?

Whatever... Sixteen is a teenager, and in most of the world (including many US states) is over the age of consent. Like I said quite clearly, the fact that 16 is not a child does not excuse Foley, but it also does not make him a paedophile.

[mtnsnake]

36. Hell yeah. George Bush is 60 & he's a child, a man-child.

[niyad]

11. last time I checked, a child was regarded in law as a person under

the age of 18, as in MINOR CHILD.

[Ediacara]

17. Sixteen certainly is a minor

But generally, sixteen is not considered a child, and paedophile is an inaccurate descriptor.

[Art_from_Ark]

63. In the case of "minor child", it is the term "minor" that refers to age,

that is, below the age of majority. "Adult child" can be used to refer to a parent's offspring who has reached the age of majority.

child

(1) A son or daughter of any age, sometimes including biological offspring, unborn children, adopted children, stepchildren, foster children and children born outside of marriage. (2) A person under an age specified by law, often 14 or 16. For example, state law may require a person to be over the age of 14 to make a valid will, or may define the crime of statutory rape as sex with a person under the age of 16. In this sense, a child can be distinguished from a minor, who is a person under the age of 18 in most states. A person below the specified legal age who is married is often considered an adult rather than a child. See also emancipation.

http://www.nolo.com/definition.cfm/Term/53666A28-C98A-4AE9-A4B1062564739566/alpha/C/

[Bucky]

18. Politics is not about absolute truth; it's about competing arguments.

If your job was to diagnose Foley, I'd be on your side of the argument. Your job and mine is to make the case as strenuously as we can, while being fair, in an adversarial relationship with the Republicans. You are not the judge or jury in this case--the voting electorate will collectively play that role in November. Today and for the next five weeks you are the advocate for one adversarial side. It makes more sense to make as strong a case against them as we can--their side will do no less.

For me the word is pedophile. If you want to waste time disputing that with me, fine. Do so. If I don't respond to you it's not because you're wrong or right, but because the academic analysis can wait till after election day. It's time to fight, argue, rally, and kvetch.

[Ediacara]

21. I would rather make my case without resorting to hyperbole

Predator, sexual harasser, power abuser, and creepy guy are all perfectly correct non-hyperbolic ways to describe Foley.

[NNN0LHI]

26. I appreciate that but honestly it would be much more interesting...

...to have Bush and/or his minions try and explain that as you just did.

Wouldn't you agree?

Don

[Ediacara]

37. I am not sure what you mean

But yes, it would be interesting to hear Hastert talk about how he knew for a year that an extremely creepy guy who used the internet to predate upon minors also happened to be a Republican congressman, and Hastert did nothing about it.

[NNN0LHI]

42. That would be an interesting question for Hastert as well

I would also like to hear Hastert try and explain the difference between a pedophile and someone who justs preys sexually on underage kids. I actually think listening to him or any Republican try and do that on TV would be a real hoot.

There are no easy explanations. By the time Hastert gets done trying to explain that difference he will look like the pedophile. But thats his job. We should let him earn his keep and do his own explaining.

Don

[Bucky]

59. Thanks. That's where I'm at too. If I were a therapist for the guy I would

insist on a precise diagnosis. The man has pretty obvious problems and is right now off licking his ego wounds (apparently he has his family with him) as a result of the hollow lie he was living on top of collapsing around him. I don't gloat at his career's demise. Moreover, I hope he didn't actually successfully abuse any of these kids. Maybe his deal is just talking naughty with teenagers.

But I'm not his therapist. I am his opponent and his scandal is an abuse of the power that our shared country placed in his trust. His behavior is absolutely a campaign issue, because it's part of the culture of corruption. The cover up by Hastert should be the bigger issue, but I'll go with what sells among the voting public. We make arguments, but ultimately the voters are the ones who decide what's important.

[sandnsea]

32. MINE were children at 16

Every legal agency in the country told me so. And if I'd punched one in the mouth, you can damn well bet I'd have been charged with child abuse.

Nobody actually knows what these boys looked like either.

[Zynx]

60. 16 sure as hell ain't an adult.

I am physically quite a bit different than when I was 16 and I'm 20.

[Ediacara]

77. I never said 16 was an adult

I simply said 16 is not a "child." Sixteen is a teenager and a minor, but sixteen is not a presexual target of a paedophile, but a too young victim of a sexual predator.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

12. If You Want To Play The Semantics Game Have Fun. But 16 Is Generally Not

at all what the definition means when it refers to children.

In most cases a child is considered someone the age of 13 or under. In the overwhelming majority of american's minds a 16 yr old would not be considered a child for sake of this context.

You state that we could use hebephile but no one would know what we're talking about. I say who cares. The fact is, there are far more people who would think one to be overdramatic and extreme by calling him a pedephile, then there would be those who think it offensive to not call him one.

[sandnsea]

27. pedophile priests

It sure as hell included 16 year old boys when it was the priests molesting kids.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

35. They Were Molesting Far Younger Than 16 Yr Olds As Well.

You know that right?

[sandnsea]

38. Most of them were teens

Does that really make any difference?

[Bucky]

13. If I was a clinician, I'd say "ephebephile". But I'm a Democrat, so...

the word I'll use is pedophile.

[William Bloode]

14. As a victim of a real pedophile,

I can tell you there is a real difference. A young child is NON SEXUAL. A teen can be very sexual, and in fact pursue relationships with older partners. (not saying it's right) Also in 35 of 50 states 16 is the age of consent, only 14 for Canada.

True pedophiles are interested in kids with little or no outward sign of sexuality. No breasts, no pubic hair, facial hair, large hips etc.

My problem with this hyperbolic use of the word is that you diminish it power using it as such. Think of the word "hero" and how it's over use has weakened the power of the word.

By y'all folks definition my 1st wife was a pedophile. it may be creepy to some, but the fact remains i was 15 and "I" pursued her, an older woman. I was quite proud of it to. When i was molested as a child i did not pursue this at all.

The big difference is that honestly young children are much more vulnerable than a teen, who is much more able to make decisions for themselves. Yes it's true, you give your 15yr old child much more responsibility than your 6yr old.

A teen may pursue some one older for what ever reason. A young child would not pursue a sexual relationship without being manipulated, or forced, simply because they are NON sexual.

[BlooInBloo]

22. DUers don't care who gets diminished by it.... They want repub blood...

I with them on the bloodlust, but not at that cost - I'll look for other ways - truthful ways to get 'em.

[William Bloode]

31. Sadly i agree.

And whats truely sad it makes them sound like the "moral majority".

What he did was bad enough, and there are good way to frame it how it is. Such as Sexual predator, deviant, etc. You don't need to go all nuclear to make the honest point.

[BlooInBloo]

33. Zactly. "Sexual predator" doesn't lessen *his* wrongs on iota.

[Withywindle]

52. I agree with you

The level of trauma is just different. No matter how unhealthy, how ill-advised, how poorly-thought-out, a consensual sexual act involving someone who has the hormones and interest to desire sex (e.g., many teenagers), is NEVER going to be as traumatic as something forced upon a more physically helpless person who doesn't even understand the act (e.g., virtually all children). It seems like that should just be common sense. I get why people are coming at this from an angry-parent point of view--but if you look at it from the POV of a teenager or a child, I should think the difference in sheer horror level would be pretty clear.

Also, I think it's pretty damn common for people to feel fleeting bursts of sexual attraction to sexually mature teenagers. (Acting upon it or not is the difference between a sleazebag and a non-sleazebag). But I think only actual pedophiles look at a prepubescent child and think of lust. I can't imagine it, myself, and in a weird way I feel kind of sorry for people who are mentally ill that way. (I cease to feel sorry for them the instant they actually inflict anything on a real child outside their fantasies.)

(edited cause I caught a typo)

[Zynx]

62. There's a difference between a 19 year old dating a 16 year old and

a 52 year old expressing very perverted thoughts towards a 15 year old.

[William Bloode]

64. Thats true, but it's also a red herring.

No one ever said it was the same. Only thing said is that pedophilia is not the interest in teens, or fully pubescent teens any way. Pedophilia is the interest in young prepubescent children. Kids much younger, much more vulnerable. Again by using the term pedophile so much you run the risk of minimizing what true pedophilia is.

[Zynx]

66. It is a disturbing form of sexual predation.

He is preying on people who are not yet fully physically and emotionally mature.

[William Bloode]

69. Once again,

Yes he is, but 1-10 year old kids are much more vulnerable, and much less emotionally mature hence the distinction. By equating what he has done with true pedophilia diminishes what true pedophilia really is.

52 yr old hitting on 15-16yr old is pretty creepy. 52yr old man hits on 6yr old= Much, much more creepy.

[Zynx]

70. I see only marginal distinctions.

The guy is a pervert. Let's leave it at that.

[William Bloode]

71. Thats a good one to use.

Pervert, sexual predator, deviant, etc. The point is there are already lots of good terms to use. Lets not use the worst one we can think while using a false context. Phrase it in true terms. It's damaging enough as it is, no need to salt it any extra.

Have a good evening, gonna run and play some games. :hi:

[Name removed]

19. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Nevernose]

20. You're my hero

I was wondering how to phrase my response, and then you phrased it for me.

[BlooInBloo]

28. lol! thx - i'm reveling in the adulation! (grin)

[sandnsea]

34. Or powerless and virginal victims

We don't know what these boys looked like, to begin with. They may well have been late bloomers and fit your description. They may have had an emotional quality of innocence. We don't know the particulars.

What we do know is that the man had an obsession with very young males who were in a situation where they were easy prey. It's him knowing it was illegal and the pattern that makes this pedophelia, not the age of the boys.

[BlooInBloo]

39. Then you and I have different understandings of what...

... pedophelia is.

Hooking up with a physiologically normal (albeit hirsute) 40 year old is not pedophilia, no matter how virginal and innocent he may me. Or how funny the movie may be.

[sandnsea]

44. So Foley was just "hooking up"

is that it?

Yeah, we've sure got different understandings.

Foley was preying on young males for years and there's no funny movie in that anywhere.

[BlooInBloo]

46. lol! You're a genius. I obviously didn't say that....

But it's genius of you to mendaciously suggest that I did.

[sandnsea]

48. You equated it to a 40 year old virgin "hook up" n/t

[BlooInBloo]

49. I'm sorry - I forgot how genius you were....

... According you *YOUR* criteria that YOU freely gave, taking a sexual interest the innocent 40 year old physiologically normal virign would count as pedophila.

As genius as I recognize you to be, you may wish to look up the term "reductio ad absurdum".

[sandnsea]

51. "very young" "powerless" "virginal" "males"

Yeah I was all about the 40 year old virgin. :eyes:

Go away.

[BlooInBloo]

54. "Or powerless and virginal victims"

No you go away. That's FUN! lol!

[sandnsea]

58. "obsession with very young males" n/t

[Nevernose]

40. Creepy perverted child molester? Yes.

Pedophile? No.

[sandnsea]

45. A distinction without a point n/t

[niyad]

24. actually, I think PERVERT would suit admirably. one could add

sick, twisted, and f****-up to that, and I think that would pretty well cover it. would that be an acceptable alternative?

[NashVegas]

41. "Dirty Old Man" Works for Me

Kinda covers all the bases.

[w8liftinglady]

68. sorry,but if a 54 year-old tried to seduce MY 16 year-old...

I would persue his ass with a vengence.There is no way my kid...who is far more wordly than these pages ...would be an appropriate "mate" for this pervert.Guilty.

[karlrschneider]

74. The difference being, I assume, is that you would have taught him

to ignore such advances rather than answering the question "do I make you horny" with "a little"

Again, that's my assumption. If it's wrong, please let me know why.

[Irreverend IX]

73. There is a huge difference...

Between sexual attraction to a 15 or 16-year-old and sexual attraction to a 7 or 8-year-old. The former have passed puberty and are sexually aware, save for extreme late bloomers. The latter are non-sexual, and it's the pre-pubescent age group that pedophiles prey on. True pedophiles almost always lose interest in children once they reach puberty. Foley's conversations about "jacking off" etc. show that he is no pedophile; he was interested in talking to sexually aware, if inexperienced, young men.

However, this doesn't mean that we shouldn't make every effort to tar him with the "pedophile" label. The media runs on sensationalism, not reason, and this story has potential to really sting the GOP.

[madmusic]

76. Notice the Taliban countries

http://www.avert.org/aofconsent.htm

[karlrschneider]

79. Interesting. Backward countries are called that for a reason, I see.

...

[slackmaster]

81. I consider anyone under about 40 to be a child

And my mom still thinks of me as one at 48.