This Troubles Me

[BoSoxGal]

People on the mainstream news are calling Jeffrey Epstein the most notorious pedophile in history.

Epstein is called a pedophile in political cartoons and all over the interwebs.

Pedophiles have a sexual attraction to prepubescent children infancy to ~10 years of age.

Hebephiles have a sexual attraction to pubescent girls and boys ~11-14 years of age.

Ephebophiles have a sexual attraction to adolescent girls and boys ~15-19 years of age.

I’m not defending Epstein or other slimy men of his ilk who have trafficked vulnerable teenagers for their sexual pleasure, but I’m troubled with people calling them pedophiles.

As recently as my grandmother’s and mother’s eras, it was not uncommon for adolescent girls to date and then marry men a decade older than themselves - because those men were established and ready to support a wife and children.

I’m certainly glad that we now typically give girls a lot more time to grow up before marriage is on the table - although marriage before 18 is lawful in several states still with parental consent - but I’m troubled to see many people on the interwebs talk about the pairings of my grandparents as though they were pedophilic relationships (is that even a thing?) because of the age differences between two sexually mature human beings.

It isn’t pedophilia to be attracted to sexually mature adolescents. It’s best not to act on the attraction, but we can all agree, can’t we, that it isn’t perverse like sexual attraction to a prepubescent child?

[Joe Guy]

Although it maybe technically wrong, I believe most people define pedophilia as a sexual attraction to children below the age of consent. Epstein just might be the most notorious pedophile in history in that context.

I can't even think of another notorious pedophile but I could probably do a search and might be reminded of someone. I just don't want to do a search for notorious pedophiles.

[datsunaholic]

Most people don't know what those other 2 terms are- in fact most people have never heard of them. This is the first time I've ever seen those terms (Hebephile and Ephebophile) in print. I've always heard the term "Pedophile" used to describe someone who desires sexual contact with someone below the age of consent.

[Crackpot]

I’m disturbed that you spend so much time thinking about this stuff you young the average person should know the difference.

[BoSoxGal]

I’m disturbed that you spend so much time thinking about this stuff you young the average person should know the difference.

The sentence structure has me a bit puzzled about the point you're trying to make.

Of course I spent a lot of time in my life thinking about this stuff - have any of YOU put actual pedophiles who acted on their paraphilitic impulses and offended on children in prison? I have. Of course I attended the specialized trainings as a prosecutor and paid actual attention to the content - would you expect any less from me? Sexual paraphilias are among the most challenging aberrant behaviors exhibited in any society and any serious law enforcement officer should be educated in the latest social sciences and hard sciences understandings of how best to intervene with, and manage, such offenders.

If in fact the average person thinks the age of consent is the same benchmark for pedophilia, then the average person must think that a very large number of their fellow citizens are pedophiles. How many people did you know in high school who dated beyond the 18 year old mark when they were a teen themselves?

The majority of states use 16 or 17 as the age of consent for sexual relations - but the same people who slept with 16 and 17 year olds would be pedophiles in a lesser number of states which use 18, I guess? That's bizarre. Also the concept that sex with a 16 year old is equivalent in any way with sex with a 6 year old - it defies logic.

I find it disturbing - among many other things - that so many ill-informed people are pointing fingers and accusing others of being pedophiles for being attracted to sexually mature adolescents when that is the age at which for millennia our forefathers began fornicating and marrying etc.

[datsunaholic]

All I was referring to was the term. I've never had the need to have known there were different legal terms based on age.

When I was in the Navy one of my shipmates carried the "Sex Offender" label. He had been convicted of statutory rape, as he and his High School girlfriend got caught. He was 18, she was 17. Didn't preclude him from enlisting in the Navy but he would never be granted a security clearance above "Confidential" which adversely affected what career paths he could take in the service. This happened in the early 1990s; I heard the story sometime in '95 or '96. Was he a pedo? No. But legally, it didn't matter. I don't know what "Level" sex offender he was stuck with, he did have to register as one whenever he moved, and that never goes away as far as I know. I could be wrong, but again, I've never had reason to find out.

I never saw any of my high school classmates dating people out of high school. I'm sure it happened, I just wasn't aware of it. Much like I wasn't aware of how many of my classmates drank, smoked, or used drugs. I wasn't privvy to those things. I wasn't particularly observant to things outside of my comfort zone, I guess. I mean, I didn't know some of my classmates or teachers were gay until my sister told me decades later. Catholics are really good at "hiding their sins".

My grandmother was married at 17 (in 1940), and her mother married at 16 in 1919 and was engaged (to someone else) before that. My grandfather was 23 and my great grandfather 22, so it was a 7 year gap in both cases. Both got married relatively early for... reasons. The rest of my ancestors, going back 3-4 generations, all seem to have married in their 20s, and age gaps were rarely over 10 years, most were less than 5.

[MajGenl.Meade]

I'm appalled that the British (Labour) gov't thinks that 16-year olds should vote. Smacks of paedophilia to me - they'll kiss anyone for a vote.

[liberty]

People on the mainstream news are calling Jeffrey Epstein the most notorious pedophile in history.

Epstein is called a pedophile in political cartoons and all over the interwebs.

Pedophiles have a sexual attraction to prepubescent children infancy to ~10 years of age.

Hebephiles have a sexual attraction to pubescent girls and boys ~11-14 years of age.

Ephebophiles have a sexual attraction to adolescent girls and boys ~15-19 years of age.

I’m not defending Epstein or other slimy men of his ilk who have trafficked vulnerable teenagers for their sexual pleasure, but I’m troubled with people calling them pedophiles.

As recently as my grandmother’s and mother’s eras, it was not uncommon for adolescent girls to date and then marry men a decade older than themselves - because those men were established and ready to support a wife and children.

I’m certainly glad that we now typically give girls a lot more time to grow up before marriage is on the table - although marriage before 18 is lawful in several states still with parental consent - but I’m troubled to see many people on the interwebs talk about the pairings of my grandparents as though they were pedophilic relationships (is that even a thing?) because of the age differences between two sexually mature human beings.

It isn’t pedophilia to be attracted to sexually mature adolescents. It’s best not to act on the attraction, but we can all agree, can’t we, that it isn’t perverse like sexual attraction to a prepubescent child?

In general, people are fairly ignorant about history. Even those considered well-educated may know dates and facts, but their understanding of history, particularly the zeitgeist of different eras, is lacking. Based on impressions I've gained from the internet, it seems that some of the worst offenders are liberals. They often struggle to accept that people in different times thought differently and were shaped by different societal norms. Many fail to grasp that behavior considered normal then may now seem alien. For example, they assume that people marrying at an early with significant age gaps were perverts or pedophiles, without understanding that historical norms were shaped by culture, necessity, and circumstance. People are influenced by the culture they grow up in, and historical figures were no exception. So, there’s nothing “wrong” with your grandparents—they were perfectly normal people for the time in which they lived

[Big RR]

Also, I think marriage, even a couple of generations back, was more of a business proposition than based on love or even sexual attraction. A thirty year old man might not be sexually attracted to a thirteen year old girl, but he knew someone that age could likely bear him a number of strong children (important in many families) and if she was pretty, might also enhance his social status as she could remain pretty for a long time. Indeed, at many times sexual attraction was part of extramarital affairs much more than marriage and while I have no doubt that some men were pedophiles (or the other "philes" you list) then, I seriously question whether it was more common than it is now (especially if we take into account that children were often thought to be adults at around 16).

[MajGenl.Meade]

In general, people are fairly ignorant about history. Even those considered well-educated may know dates and facts, but their understanding of history, particularly the zeitgeist of different eras, is lacking.

Old friend liberty made a post
AI AI oh!

[BoSoxGal]

All I was referring to was the term. I've never had the need to have known there were different legal terms based on age.

When I was in the Navy one of my shipmates carried the "Sex Offender" label. He had been convicted of statutory rape, as he and his High School girlfriend got caught. He was 18, she was 17. Didn't preclude him from enlisting in the Navy but he would never be granted a security clearance above "Confidential" which adversely affected what career paths he could take in the service. This happened in the early 1990s; I heard the story sometime in '95 or '96. Was he a pedo? No. But legally, it didn't matter. I don't know what "Level" sex offender he was stuck with, he did have to register as one whenever he moved, and that never goes away as far as I know. I could be wrong, but again, I've never had reason to find out.

I never saw any of my high school classmates dating people out of high school. I'm sure it happened, I just wasn't aware of it. Much like I wasn't aware of how many of my classmates drank, smoked, or used drugs. I wasn't privvy to those things. I wasn't particularly observant to things outside of my comfort zone, I guess. I mean, I didn't know some of my classmates or teachers were gay until my sister told me decades later. Catholics are really good at "hiding their sins".

My grandmother was married at 17 (in 1940), and her mother married at 16 in 1919 and was engaged (to someone else) before that. My grandfather was 23 and my great grandfather 22, so it was a 7 year gap in both cases. Both got married relatively early for... reasons. The rest of my ancestors, going back 3-4 generations, all seem to have married in their 20s, and age gaps were rarely over 10 years, most were less than 5.

Those terms I shared aren't legal terms - they're scientific terms from the world of psychology/psychiatry, but which carry over to the legal realm in the forensic aspect. This is noteworthy because in the psychological/psychiatric realm, neither hebophilia nor ephebophilia is considered a disorder - it is a matter of some debate but neither is included in the manuals and literature as a paraphilitic disorder, but pedophilia - for obvious reasons - is. Thus it seems that those who study the human mind do not find anything unnatural about sexual attraction to developing/developed sexually mature bodies regardless of age differences otherwise considered actionable in other realms of society.

The situation you describe regarding your ship mate is one which in a very great many jurisdictions in the US would be recognized as a 'Romeo-Juliet' case, and which would in many of those jurisdictions result in a deferred finding with charges dropping off subsequent to a successful probation and thus no lifelong registry requirement, or in some jurisdictions, no charges at all. But in some jurisdictions, yes, you'll find teenagers having their lives ruined in perpetuity by overzealous, Puritanical prosecution mentality. A lot depends on the race of the 'offender,' their socioeconomic status, and the attitudes of the parents involved - and the luck of the draw when it comes to prosecutorial attitude.

This is one of the aspects of American prosecution which I found so troubling.

Meanwhile in the majority of American states child marriage is still legal, many states have no minimum age so long as parents consent - and obviously parents are not to be relied upon to be upstanding and healthy, or we wouldn't need child welfare agencies. Marriages of children as young as 10 years old have been observed, although the majority are girls (sometimes boys) in their mid to late teens. Only 16 states in the union have passed legislation banning all child marriage and setting the minimum age to marry at 18.

I guess I'm frustrated by a couple of different things here - the failure of the public to recognize that someone who primarily has sexual interest in prepubescent children as young as infant age is not the equivalent of someone who finds sexually mature teenagers to be sexually attractive is more than a little mind-blowing, it seems so logically to be two very different issues.

And the hypocrisy of a society which is decrying the predation of teenaged girls and boys by adult men and women but which doesn't seem motivated to pass the laws that would more effectively criminalize those behaviors - probably because while people are understandably sickened at the idea of teenaged girls being trafficked by middle aged wealthy men/women, they don't want to see their 19 year old son have his life ruined by copulating with his 17 year old girlfriend who is probably as - if not more - mature than him intellectually and emotionally.

It's a pickle, I guess.

[ex-khobar Andy]

Yes I didn't think a 17 year old male could become a sex offender through having sex with his 16 year old girlfriend. I thought there was something like a 3 year gap 'allowed' - or at least, not prosecuted - at that age but it might depend on jurisdiction

[BoSoxGal]

Yes I didn't think a 17 year old male could become a sex offender through having sex with his 16 year old girlfriend. I thought there was something like a 3 year gap 'allowed' - or at least, not prosecuted - at that age but it might depend on jurisdiction

Depending on the jurisdiction, both parties at those ages might be too young to consent and thus you could see them both as victims - or both as offenders. Bizarre, isn’t it?

We could go off on a tangent about how prosecutors are handling preteens and teens sending nudies of themselves to each other - technically, they’re engaged in child pornography. Bizarre, isn’t it?

Some states have specific statutory exceptions as to small age gaps between parties both in their teens or one in early 20s - so that if a 17 year old girl is having sex with her 20 year old boyfriend in a jurisdiction that sets the age of consent at 18, potential for prosecution might be precluded or limited in nature, compared to if the 17 year old girl is having sex with her 30 year old boyfriend. And quite understandably, some folks find those distinctions arbitrary and capricious.

It’s a pickle.

[Joe Guy]

Old friend liberty made a post
AI AI oh!

And in that post he had some help
AI AI oh!....