Minor-attracted person

[Alexbrn]

• Minor-attracted person (T-H-L)
• Currently at AfD (second time around)
• Discussion at FT/N

Something feels very off about this. Not just the article itself but a sense that some kind of meta-point about Wikipedia itself is in play. Anybody know more?

[orangepi]

What it suggests is that, between pedophile trolls and people with a stupid interpretation of GNG, you can almost get a majority of participants in an AFD to support content like this.

If they were a bit smoother, they would be complaining about "Delete" voters canvassing the discussion as well.

As far as the broader implications of "this is not the first person to use this playbook to promote an agenda", I ain't saying nothing.

[Giraffe Stapler]

• Minor-attracted person (T-H-L)
• Currently at AfD (second time around)
• Discussion at FT/N

Something feels very off about this. Not just the article itself but a sense that some kind of meta-point about Wikipedia itself is in play. Anybody know more?

I believe that it is fair and accurate to say that all of the articles created by 22spears (T-C-L) are directly related to pedophilia: Predator Poachers (T-H-L), Primary prevention of child sexual abuse (T-H-L), Allyn Walker (T-H-L), and Stigma of pedophilia (T-H-L). I haven't gone through them thoroughly, but it looks like every single edit they have made relates to pedophilia. They are a "single purpose account". Again, I haven't had a thorough look, but their edits appear to be pushing an anti-anti-pedophilia viewpoint.

The appearance of supporters like 86sedan (T-C-L) (also an SPA) and Casdmo (T-C-L) (editing again after a 12 year absence) suggests off-wiki collusion.

[Giraffe Stapler]

22spear's Primary prevention of child sexual abuse (T-H-L) is sprinkled with variations on "minor attracted persons" despite the sources in each case using "pedophile".

[Hemiauchenia]

I'm sympathetic to the views of Allyn Walker et al that paedophilia (the exclusive or primary sexual attraction to children regardless of whether they have offended or not) is a psychiatric disorder that ought to be treated by medical professionals but the swarm of SPAs surrounding this topic really rubs me the wrong way.

There does seem to be considerable interest in this term, looking at the archived view history https://pageviews.wmcloud.org/?project= ... ted_person , so some of the SPAs may actually just be from people clicking on the article rather than specifically canvassing, though some sort of off-wiki meatpuppetry seems plausible also.

[casualdejekyll]

I feel like somebody's trying to frame somebody else of socking at this discussion but can't figure out who's being framed and who's the framer. There's some weird stuff going on there.

[eppur si muove]

I'm sympathetic to the views of Allyn Walker et al that paedophilia (the exclusive or primary sexual attraction to children regardless of whether they have offended or not) is a psychiatric disorder that ought to be treated by medical professionals but the swarm of SPAs surrounding this topic really rubs me the wrong way.

A primary sexual attraction is a psychological condition. I suspect that it is wishful thinking to assume that a socially undesirable condition is necessarily treatable psychiatrically. Various Western countries are outlawing conversion therapies for same-sex attraction partly because in is ineffective. So why should an orientation towards children be any more susceptible to change? There could be some sort of psychosocial interventions that look at strategies and techniques to avoid the orientation causing problems for children. E.g. persuading people with that orientation not to take up careers or voluntary positions that entail spending a lot of time with children and looking at ways to avoid situations where the person might be alone with a child. But those are not "treatments" that "cure" the condition.

Having different terminology to describe the orientation and the sexual exploitation of children is useful. For a start some of those who commit sex crimes against children are not primarily sexually-oriented towards them. However, when it comes to people self-organising under some sort of "non-stigmatised" neologism, it's hard to conceive how such organisations will not be used as covers to build networks to exchange pornography etc. Prominent individuals involved in the historic Paedophile Information Exchange did turn out to be exchanging much more than just information. Also I think it is highly unlikely that any new terminology will not rapidly become as stigmatised as the existing language.

[Hemiauchenia]

I'm sympathetic to the views of Allyn Walker et al that paedophilia (the exclusive or primary sexual attraction to children regardless of whether they have offended or not) is a psychiatric disorder that ought to be treated by medical professionals but the swarm of SPAs surrounding this topic really rubs me the wrong way.

A primary sexual attraction is a psychological condition. I suspect that it is wishful thinking to assume that a socially undesirable condition is necessarily treatable psychiatrically. Various Western countries are outlawing conversion therapies for same-sex attraction partly because in is ineffective. So why should an orientation towards children be any more susceptible to change? There could be some sort of psychosocial interventions that look at strategies and techniques to avoid the orientation causing problems for children. E.g. persuading people with that orientation not to take up careers or voluntary positions that entail spending a lot of time with children and looking at ways to avoid situations where the person might be alone with a child. But those are not "treatments" that "cure" the condition.

Having different terminology to describe the orientation and the sexual exploitation of children is useful. For a start some of those who commit sex crimes against children are not primarily sexually-oriented towards them. However, when it comes to people self-organising under some sort of "non-stigmatised" neologism, it's hard to conceive how such organisations will not be used as covers to build networks to exchange pornography etc. Prominent individuals involved in the historic Paedophile Information Exchange did turn out to be exchanging much more than just information. Also I think it is highly unlikely that any new terminology will not rapidly become as stigmatised as the existing language.

Paedophilia is usually considered a paraphilia, not a sexual orientation per se. https://www.msdmanuals.com/en-gb/home/m ... pedophilia I agree with your obvservation that "start some of those who commit sex crimes against children are not primarily sexually-oriented towards them", and those people would not be considered paedophiles in the clinical sense of the term, but obviously would be included in the more general way the term is used by the public.

The MSD source I linked above suggests that treatment involves "long-term psychotherapy and drugs that alter the sex drive and reduce testosterone levels.", which sounds about right to me.

[eppur si muove]

I'm sympathetic to the views of Allyn Walker et al that paedophilia (the exclusive or primary sexual attraction to children regardless of whether they have offended or not) is a psychiatric disorder that ought to be treated by medical professionals but the swarm of SPAs surrounding this topic really rubs me the wrong way.

A primary sexual attraction is a psychological condition. I suspect that it is wishful thinking to assume that a socially undesirable condition is necessarily treatable psychiatrically. Various Western countries are outlawing conversion therapies for same-sex attraction partly because in is ineffective. So why should an orientation towards children be any more susceptible to change? There could be some sort of psychosocial interventions that look at strategies and techniques to avoid the orientation causing problems for children. E.g. persuading people with that orientation not to take up careers or voluntary positions that entail spending a lot of time with children and looking at ways to avoid situations where the person might be alone with a child. But those are not "treatments" that "cure" the condition.

Having different terminology to describe the orientation and the sexual exploitation of children is useful. For a start some of those who commit sex crimes against children are not primarily sexually-oriented towards them. However, when it comes to people self-organising under some sort of "non-stigmatised" neologism, it's hard to conceive how such organisations will not be used as covers to build networks to exchange pornography etc. Prominent individuals involved in the historic Paedophile Information Exchange did turn out to be exchanging much more than just information. Also I think it is highly unlikely that any new terminology will not rapidly become as stigmatised as the existing language.

Paedophilia is usually considered a paraphilia, not a sexual orientation per se. https://www.msdmanuals.com/en-gb/home/m ... pedophilia I agree with your obvservation that "start some of those who commit sex crimes against children are not primarily sexually-oriented towards them", and those people would not be considered paedophiles in the clinical sense of the term, but obviously would be included in the more general way the term is used by the public.

The MSD source I linked above suggests that treatment involves "long-term psychotherapy and drugs that alter the sex drive and reduce testosterone levels.", which sounds about right to me.

Er it was your post that referred to it as an orientation.

"Paraphilia" is really just a neologism that was used to replace such prior terminology as sexual perversion or deviance. And just like "necrophilia" etc it was clearly invented by someone who had not studied Greek at any length. The Greek root refers to a liking or interest in someone or something in a non-sexual way. A philosopher does not jerk off when reading The Republic or the Critique of Pure Reason and a Francophile does not use the Tricolour as a sex-aid. Which is why one of my classics teachers complained back in the 1970s about how the people who would now call themselves "minor attracted" then called themselves "paedophiles" because that implied that they might be interested in the well-being of youngsters when in reality they were "pederasts" i.e. motivated chiefly by their desire to fuck them. But the argument for the use or "er-" instead pf "phil-" in this context is now as lost as that about "television" being a perverse mix of Greek and Latin.

But, back on subject, the bets known minority sexual orientation (i.e. homosexuality) was classified in with what are now called paraphilias in psychiatric textbooks until round about the 1980s. It's just a coincidence that the switch to the "non-stigmatising" term of "paraphilia" from sexual deviance/perversion as the bucket to put them in instead happened at the same time as the declassification of homosexuality as belonging to that category. Being trans was included there for rather longer. So, for all psychiatry's pretence at scientific detachment, it is highly liable to trends and fashions in what is and is not socially approved of in broader establishment society. Remember how there used to be a psychiatric diagnosis "drapetomania" for slaves who escaped from those who exploited them?

This paperlink which is linked from the Wikipedia article on paraphilia does seek to identify things that distinguish the nature of homosexuality from paraphilias. It contains the following statement.

Other than by being sexual, the most salient feature on which male homosexuality and the paraphilias resemble each other is their lifelong nature—starting in childhood and being immutable despite all efforts to convert them to conventional sexual interests.

So my point in my earlier comment that the condition of paedophilia is unlikely to be "cured" by psychiatric treatment stands. In my post, I hadn't considered the hormonal treatment that you mention. But that is something used to manage the consequences of paedophilia not to cure it in itself and so fits in with the psychosocial interventions I mentioned. The use of the testosterone-suppressing drugs can be compared to that of powerful opiates in the treatment of a broken leg. The opiates do nothing to help heal the leg but they help manage the pain that arises from it. The drugs given to the paedophiles do nothing to treat the paedophilia but help manage the risk to children that arises from it.

[eppur si muove]

Thinking about it, the problem with "minor attracted" is exactly the same as my teacher saw with "paedophile". It is weakened language used to downplay what is really going on.

Very many people find that young animals including young humans look cute. Churches use young boys in their services because of the common emotions and beliefs people have about children. The Blood Libel against Jews played on that. And Leni Riefenstahl's propaganda films use lots of shots of young children before they get down to the Nazi rallies themselves. Similarly I can think of three operas written within about 20 years of each other that have single children on stage at the end. In Madama Butterfly and Wozzeck they are the orphans of the title characters and in Der Rosenkavalier the Marshallin's page runs on stage after the principals have left. These are all play on conventional attitudes towards young children including that children are attractive.

"Minor-attracted person" suggests that paedophiles find children attractive in a similar way to everyday folk. A more accurate description using plain English words would be "person who lusts after children".

[Vigilant]

Call them what they are: Child rapists.

Treat them as they deserve to be treated: Kill them.

[Giraffe Stapler]

"Minor-attracted person" suggests that paedophiles find children attractive in a similar way to everyday folk. A more accurate description using plain English words would be "person who lusts after children".

Yes, exactly. Like the North American Man/Boy Love Association (NAMBLA). They love each other, don't you see?

22spears created the article Primary prevention of child sexual abuse (T-H-L) which contains this paragraph:

Incarceration, a criminal justice approach, is a form of tertiary prevention. The societal preference to prioritize tertiary prevention methods over primary prevention has been criticized by academics due to the fact that the recidivism rate for sex offenders is already much lower than those of other types of offenders. A research from 2005 stated that while property and drug offenders had recidivism rates above 80%, child sex offenders had a recidivism rate lower than 14%.[5]

This is more or less what the source says, but the comparison of recidivism rates for child sexual abuse to those for property crimes and drug offenses seems to ignore the impact on victims of those particular crimes.

[Beeblebrox]

During a recent conversation, someone told me about a psychologist they knew who became an advocate for reforming pedos through treatment. After a few years, she came to the conclusion that it was futile and switched sides, now working as an advocate for the victims.

"Minor attracted person" is the same type of shitty language as "had sex with underage girls". I'm with Vig on this one, these people are rapists and should be treated as rapists.

[Scorpions13256]

As a future DNA analyst, I am a little too knowledgeable about this topic.

I used to be sympathetic to the idea that we need to encourage non-offending pedophiles to seek help. However, after seeing scary crap happen on various mental health support websites after they adopt that mentality, I now support the status quo. Encouraging pedophiles to seek help openly only makes them prone to radicalization by offending pedophiles. This article makes me fear the direction society is heading.

I know a therapist who specializes in porn addiction. She said that very few of the child porn addicts she works with seek help on their own.

The sad thing about pedophilic child molesters is that 80-90% of them are perfectly capable of functioning normally in a sexual relationship with an adult. Most get more pleasure from sex with adults than with children.

[eppur si muove]

As a future DNA analyst, I am a little too knowledgeable about this topic.

I used to be sympathetic to the idea that we need to encourage non-offending pedophiles to seek help. However, after seeing scary crap happen on various mental health support websites after they adopt that mentality, I now support the status quo. Encouraging pedophiles to seek help openly only makes them prone to radicalization by offending pedophiles. This article makes me fear the direction society is heading.

I know a therapist who specializes in porn addiction. She said that very few of the child porn addicts she works with seek help on their own.

The sad thing about pedophilic child molesters is that 80-90% of them are perfectly capable of functioning normally in a sexual relationship with an adult. Most get more pleasure from sex with adults than with children.

I don't know what the law is where you are. in the UK professionals are meant to break confidentiality and report potential offences against children. So if the pornography involves video or photos of actual children or things that look as if they have been generated from such photos, then I believe it would have to be reported. So the only child pornography for which someone could seek help of their own accord would have to be very obviously not drawn from life.

Historically far too many groups in the UK had connections with PIE. These include the Albany Trust, a counselling and therapy organisation that specialises in sex and relationships. I would hope that mental health charities in the UK would be more careful now, But I find it hard to conceive how advocacy groups and fellowships would not be exploited by offenders.

I think the changes in the law to equalise the homosexual and heterosexual ages of consent and to allow gay marriage have made it much clearer that consensual adult relationships should be legitimate whatever gender combination is involved while those between adults and young people should not. Before these advances in gay rights, people like the water melon man whose BLP Giraffe Stapler has highlighted elsewhere on WPO were able to portray themselves as victims of homophobic discrimination when in fact they are just dirty old men who brought things on themselves by exploiting vulnerable young people..

[Scorpions13256]

As a future DNA analyst, I am a little too knowledgeable about this topic.

I used to be sympathetic to the idea that we need to encourage non-offending pedophiles to seek help. However, after seeing scary crap happen on various mental health support websites after they adopt that mentality, I now support the status quo. Encouraging pedophiles to seek help openly only makes them prone to radicalization by offending pedophiles. This article makes me fear the direction society is heading.

I know a therapist who specializes in porn addiction. She said that very few of the child porn addicts she works with seek help on their own.

The sad thing about pedophilic child molesters is that 80-90% of them are perfectly capable of functioning normally in a sexual relationship with an adult. Most get more pleasure from sex with adults than with children.

I don't know what the law is where you are. in the UK professionals are meant to break confidentiality and report potential offences against children. So if the pornography involves video or photos of actual children or things that look as if they have been generated from such photos, then I believe it would have to be reported. So the only child pornography for which someone could seek help of their own accord would have to be very obviously not drawn from life.

Historically far too many groups in the UK had connections with PIE. These include the Albany Trust, a counselling and therapy organisation that specialises in sex and relationships. I would hope that mental health charities in the UK would be more careful now, But I find it hard to conceive how advocacy groups and fellowships would not be exploited by offenders.

I think the changes in the law to equalise the homosexual and heterosexual ages of consent and to allow gay marriage have made it much clearer that consensual adult relationships should be legitimate whatever gender combination is involved while those between adults and young people should not. Before these advances in gay rights, people like the water melon man whose BLP Giraffe Stapler has highlighted elsewhere on WPO were able to portray themselves as victims of homophobic discrimination when in fact they are just dirty old men who brought things on themselves by exploiting vulnerable young people..

In the United States, therapists only have to report you if you've molested a child or if you have created or distributed child porn. In California, therapists must report you if you admit to downloading it, but not in my state.

[Konveyor Belt]

I feel like somebody's trying to frame somebody else of socking at this discussion but can't figure out who's being framed and who's the framer. There's some weird stuff going on there.

This really applies to the page itself as well. The whole pushing of the term "minor attracted person" on Wikipedia is almost certainly an attempt to frame somebody/promote an agenda, but I'm not sure what agenda is being advanced here. Is it actual pedophiles trying to rebrand? Right-wingers trying to smear LGBT people? Or just a new euphemism? The term has been used for all three purposes in the past, but I'm curious which one it's being used as here.

[Vigilant]

Jimmy Wales and Lily Cole should both be looked at with a jaundiced eye here.

[tinyboxs]

now at WP:ANI

[eppur si muove]

now at WP:ANI

Where someone has mentioned 22spears unsavoury user page. This features an animation of a small-breasted figure in a bikini doing a dance that apparently originated in Popotan, a Japanese computer game aimed at adult men in which the player's character is meant to engage in relationships with three sisters aged 18, 14 and 11! The game acquired an anime series. There's a review of the anime here:https://www.animenewsnetwork.com/shelf-life/2004-12-30

Popotan is about naked women, breasts, dandelions, and magical powers. The story may be vague enough (read: nonexistent), but the real damnation comes in the characters. Ai is a big-chested woman who (I paused the disc and took out a ruler to make sure) has tits the size of her head. She has two little sisters, one of whom loves flashing breasts as much as her big sister, and the other one is a prepubescent loli who not only has a predilection for clinging on to breasts and cow udders and anything else “puffy,” but also shows her underaged nipples every vile episode

At least the "minor attracted persons" who watch this crap aren't watching real child abuse while they're doing this. But it's hardly an interest to celebrate on your user page.

[The Blue Newt]

The important takeaway here: the knee-jerk response to someone pointing out something that is just not right on Wiki is to block them.

[Smultronstället]

As a future DNA analyst, I am a little too knowledgeable about this topic.

I used to be sympathetic to the idea that we need to encourage non-offending pedophiles to seek help. However, after seeing scary crap happen on various mental health support websites after they adopt that mentality, I now support the status quo. Encouraging pedophiles to seek help openly only makes them prone to radicalization by offending pedophiles. This article makes me fear the direction society is heading.

I know a therapist who specializes in porn addiction. She said that very few of the child porn addicts she works with seek help on their own.

The sad thing about pedophilic child molesters is that 80-90% of them are perfectly capable of functioning normally in a sexual relationship with an adult. Most get more pleasure from sex with adults than with children.

Can you expand on what you saw occur on the websites you mentioned after they adopted that stance?

There is a dearth of trained mental health professionals to handle these people. One subset of the population is teens who definitely do need help to learn to avoid places where kids are. Maybe if they are given strong boundaries and professional attention when they are young, they can learn. In general, sex offenders do not recover with treatment, but some may realize they can't be near the population they predate on.

[Randy from Boise]

During a recent conversation, someone told me about a psychologist they knew who became an advocate for reforming pedos through treatment. After a few years, she came to the conclusion that it was futile and switched sides, now working as an advocate for the victims.

"Minor attracted person" is the same type of shitty language as "had sex with underage girls". I'm with Vig on this one, these people are rapists and should be treated as rapists.

Actually, it is a term used by some in academia.

Which is not to say the page should exist. I'll leave that decision for the partisans.

t

[Hemiauchenia]

During a recent conversation, someone told me about a psychologist they knew who became an advocate for reforming pedos through treatment. After a few years, she came to the conclusion that it was futile and switched sides, now working as an advocate for the victims.

"Minor attracted person" is the same type of shitty language as "had sex with underage girls". I'm with Vig on this one, these people are rapists and should be treated as rapists.

Actually, it is a term used by some in academia.

Which is not to say the page should exist. I'll leave that decision for the partisans.

t

From reading academic reviews of Allyn Walkers book (e.g. https://link-springer-com.wikipedialibr ... 22-09606-3 ) One of the main reasons why the term seems to be used in academia is to distinguish people with pedophillic tendencies but who have not offended, from sex offenders, the latter to which the term "paedophile" is usually associated.

[Konveyor Belt]

Premeditated Chaos just indeffed 22spears for "an uncomfortable pattern of pro-pedophilia POV pushing". The OP of the ANI thread, MrPinkingShears (T-C-L), was earlier blocked by Bbb23, I suppose we'll see if that gets overturned.

In terms of the question I posed above, it now definitely seems like the first option is what's at play here.

[tinyboxs]

Seems to me what we have seen with 22spears (T-C-L) is a kind of sick fascination with topics relating to pedophilia (cf. the old revision of their user page) more than an attempt at consistent POV pushing, though this might lead one to the same conclusions about their personal proclivities. I just can't understand their contributions to Tom O'Carroll (T-H-L) in the light of pro-pedo POV. Why would this "pro-prevention" lobbying movement or whatever want people to see their relation to an already-convicted criminal advertised on said criminal's Wikipedia page? I'm pretty suspicious of 86sedan (T-C-L), an self-proclaimed LEGITSOCK with a similar name to 22spears, who shows up in the same places and has recently voted keep on other AfDs for 22's articles, but this whole situation still feels like it could be a smoke screen or a joe job, as others have already said.

Edit: person I was writing about got blocked under my nose

[Ritchie333]

Premeditated Chaos just indeffed 22spears for "an uncomfortable pattern of pro-pedophilia POV pushing". The OP of the ANI thread, MrPinkingShears (T-C-L), was earlier blocked by Bbb23, I suppose we'll see if that gets overturned.

I have reversed the block on MrPinkingShears. If I was Bbb23, I would apologise for the block and try and distance myself from the inferred support of pro-paedophile POV pushers as much as possible.

[eppur si muove]

suspicious of 86sedan (T-C-L), an self-proclaimed LEGITSOCK with a similar name to 22spears, who shows up in the same places and has recently voted keep on other AfDs for 22's articles,[/s] but this whole situation still feels like it could be a smoke screen or a joe job, as others have already said.

Edit: person I was writing about got blocked under my nose

So is the master account going to get blocked too?

86sedan posted the following on 22spears page shortly before getting blocked themselves: diff

It's a shame what has happened to you
You can rest assured that you are in the right, and that the book-burners are nothing but permanently-online cowards who disguise their colloquial-tier prejudice as rules-based "skepticism" and "deboonking" hobbyism. This is why Wikipedia is well known for its complete inability to handle any number of controversial topics, and why single-purpose editing is necessary for the safety of serious researchers. My email is listed in my profile. --86Sedan 10:01, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

The use of language does suggest a narcisistic belief that they are some sort of superior being capable of thinking on a level far above ordinary mortals and their cowardly prejudices against the rape of children.

I cannot see their email there, nor can I see any evidence of an edit to remove it.

[The Blue Newt]

“Debooking?” That’s a clue to …something. Damnfino what.

[tinyboxs]

“Debooking?”

Seems to be a pun on "debunk" and the "coom"/"goon" (meaning masturbate) meme. A slur for trans people with a similar origin is "troon". This is probably trying to suggest that the kind of debunking being done was mastubatory/self-congratulatory.

[DFlhb]

Yes, these "coom"/"goon"-derived words are popular on /pol/ (T-H-L) and presumably on websites with similar cultures.

[Vigilant]

Come to the Farms for the lulz.
Stay for the pejorative vocabulary lesson.

[tinyboxs]

Come to the Farms for the lulz.
Stay for the pejorative vocabulary lesson.

Isn't this whole ordeal about pejorative vocabulary?

[Vigilant]

Come to the Farms for the lulz.
Stay for the pejorative vocabulary lesson.

Isn't this whole ordeal about pejorative vocabulary?

It's not the only topic in thrall to this phenomenon.

[ArmasRebane]

I'm sympathetic to the views of Allyn Walker et al that paedophilia (the exclusive or primary sexual attraction to children regardless of whether they have offended or not) is a psychiatric disorder that ought to be treated by medical professionals but the swarm of SPAs surrounding this topic really rubs me the wrong way.

There does seem to be considerable interest in this term, looking at the archived view history https://pageviews.wmcloud.org/?project= ... ted_person , so some of the SPAs may actually just be from people clicking on the article rather than specifically canvassing, though some sort of off-wiki meatpuppetry seems plausible also.

Seems like the overarching problem is it can be easy to identify a pedophile but there's no actual psychiatric treatment available, even for the people who want it. Child safety is such a fraught topic and the hysteria and moral panics around them often do more harm than good, but it's also clear there are plenty of people who just want to legitimize their sexual attraction to children, and that's clearly what the "minor-attracted person" language stuff is trying to do.

[tarantino]

86sedan was blocked on enwiktionary in 2021 for edits he made to MAP.

[Ritchie333]

On related note, I'm not happy that Wikipedia's article on Pedophilia (T-H-L) defines somebody as no longer being pre-pubescent at 13, cited to a single source - Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders Text Revision by the American Psychiatric Association (T-H-L). There is no way on earth my kids had grown up enough to understand sexual attraction at that age.

[eppur si muove]

On related note, I'm not happy that Wikipedia's article on Pedophilia (T-H-L) defines somebody as no longer being pre-pubescent at 13, cited to a single source - Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders Text Revision by the American Psychiatric Association (T-H-L). There is no way on earth my kids had grown up enough to understand sexual attraction at that age.

The DSM is one of the two standard places to look at for definitions of psychiatric disorders. The other is the International Classification of Diseases whose definition at least within the US can be found at pedophilia at link There the definition from an older version of the DSM is referenced in a definition including the phrase

a prepubescent child (generally age 13 or younger).

In any case, the whole point of the age of consent in very many countries being above the age of onset of puberty is precisely because it's generally believed that most kids, not just yours, aren't mature enough to understand the implications of what is happening to them at the onset of puberty and therefore still need protection from whatever a "minor-attracted .person" might want to do despite potentially having urges of their own.

[Giraffe Stapler]

Someone needs to ask if the main account of "legitimate alt account" 86sedan (T-C-L) has been identified and blocked. And Casdmo (T-C-L) seems to have been ignored for some reason. An account returning after 12 years inactivity just to support a now blocked pedophilia advocacy account? That doesn't happen by accident...

[EDIT to add] Also missed R alvarez02 (T-C-L). Observer42436 (T-C-L) seems to have been indeffed based on just voting to keep some of the articles created by 22spears, but they have clearly been recruited from whatever legitimate professional academic sex researcher forum these guys hang out in (although 86sedan says there's a discussion at boychat, so who knows?).

[eppur si muove]

Someone needs to ask if the main account of "legitimate alt account" 86sedan (T-C-L) has been identified and blocked.

That's what I'm wondering too.

And Casdmo (T-C-L) seems to have been ignored for some reason. An account returning after 12 years inactivity just to support a now blocked pedophilia advocacy account? That doesn't happen by accident...

[EDIT to add] Also missed R alvarez02 (T-C-L). Observer42436 (T-C-L) seems to have been indeffed based on just voting to keep some of the articles created by 22spears, but they have clearly been recruited from whatever legitimate professional academic sex researcher forum these guys hang out in (although 86sedan says there's a discussion at boychat, so who knows?).

Talking about legitimate professional academic sex researchers, diff

If 86sedan is really the serous researcher they claim to be, I await the appearance in a mainstream psychological, sociological or health journal of an article on Wikipedia's 'book-burners [and] permanently-online cowards who disguise their colloquial-tier prejudice as rules-based "skepticism" and "deboonking" hobbyism'. By mainstream I mean a journal at least as respectable as the one where Grabowski and Klein published their recent piece about Wikipedia and coming from an academic publisher of similar respectability to theirs. And as a respectable journal I would not expect it to be subject to a boycott by many academics within its field.

[MaryKarrel]

86sedan is the NewgonWiki user JohnHolt [Archived link to a pro-pedophilia site: link]. At diff he is referring to his own canvassing on BoyChat. I think this throwaway account on RationalWiki might be him as well.

[eppur si muove]

[EDIT to add] Also missed R alvarez02 (T-C-L).

Alvarez's previous contribution to Wikipedia was to add the following to Craig Rodwell (T-H-L)

From 13 to 14 years old, Rodwell had sex with “hundreds of men” in Chicago. He would go cruising outside of gay bars to meet these men. Speaking of the experience, he said “This is what I lived for, literally. And that’s all I thought about all day long, just so I could get downtown and go cruising. Uh, it was, oh, it was just, I get thrilled now even thinking about it, those, those, those times. It had a great sense of freedom about it and adventure and, oh, I met all kinds of guys—Air Force guys, cops, you name it. I met all kinds of guys during high school”. When Rodwell was 14, he was charged and convicted by the Chicago police for the crime of juvenile delinquency when he was caught walking home after having sex with a man in his thirties. He was ultimately sentenced to two years of probation.

Does anyone notice a theme?

[eppur si muove]

Casdmo (T-C-L) doesn't seem to have been a problematic editor when they were previously active.
Pokelova (T-C-L) has probably destroyed whatever chance she had of ever becoming an admin given how insistently she has expressed her belief that MrPinkingShears is the only person who was appropriately blocked in all this

[Scorpions13256]

As a future DNA analyst, I am a little too knowledgeable about this topic.

I used to be sympathetic to the idea that we need to encourage non-offending pedophiles to seek help. However, after seeing scary crap happen on various mental health support websites after they adopt that mentality, I now support the status quo. Encouraging pedophiles to seek help openly only makes them prone to radicalization by offending pedophiles. This article makes me fear the direction society is heading.

I know a therapist who specializes in porn addiction. She said that very few of the child porn addicts she works with seek help on their own.

The sad thing about pedophilic child molesters is that 80-90% of them are perfectly capable of functioning normally in a sexual relationship with an adult. Most get more pleasure from sex with adults than with children.

Can you expand on what you saw occur on the websites you mentioned after they adopted that stance?

There is a dearth of trained mental health professionals to handle these people. One subset of the population is teens who definitely do need help to learn to avoid places where kids are. Maybe if they are given strong boundaries and professional attention when they are young, they can learn. In general, sex offenders do not recover with treatment, but some may realize they can't be near the population they predate on.

The website I'm talking about was Psychforums. I used to frequent the OCD forum when my mental health was severe. They also had a paraphilias forum. Originally, you were not allowed to normalize pedophilia or support legalizing child abuse, but over time the number of pedophilies not following this rule began to outnumber the pedophiles that did. By the time the mods shut it down in 2015, they were DM'ing each other child porn and rape fantasies.

[tinyboxs]

Returning to the possibility of a Joe job or double bluff, it's worth considering that pro-pedo elements might have a reason of their own to want the article salted. Could SPAs on both sides have come from the same people with the plan to derail the discussion and promote panic?

[MaryKarrel]

Nelson Maatman and Marthijn Uittenbogaard are Dutch pro-pedophilia activists. In 2022 they fled the country to avoid criminal penalties. They were recaptured in Latin America---Maatman in Mexico and Uittenbogaard in Ecuador. Operation Underground Railroad (T-H-L) was involved in both arrests.[1][2] OUR is an American anti-trafficking organization; their methods are controversial and the founder has a history of exaggerated or misleading claims.[3]

In March 2023, shortly before Uittenbogaard's scheduled court date in Ecuador, 86sedan edited the Wikipedia article about OUR, adding material favorable to Maatman and Uittenbogaard and expanding the criticism section. Then JohnHolt went on BoyChat to gloat about it:

Importantly, the full story on Marthijn and Nelson has also been published there. This should be of great support as we go into legal proceedings, since that article (or a translation thereof) is the only "reliable" source of information on OUR.
[Archived link to a pro-pedophilia site: link]

Later that month, 86sedan added a translated version to the Spanish Wikipedia, Operación Ferrocarril Subterránea.

[Tarc]

I'm sympathetic to the views of Allyn Walker et al that paedophilia (the exclusive or primary sexual attraction to children regardless of whether they have offended or not) is a psychiatric disorder that ought to be treated by medical professionals but the swarm of SPAs surrounding this topic really rubs me the wrong way.

It ought to be treated by castration, honestly.

Oh, and look who is sniffing around the edges of this topic area over at the Wiktionary, our old buddy; https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Special: ... s_Advocate

[Vigilant]

I'm sympathetic to the views of Allyn Walker et al that paedophilia (the exclusive or primary sexual attraction to children regardless of whether they have offended or not) is a psychiatric disorder that ought to be treated by medical professionals but the swarm of SPAs surrounding this topic really rubs me the wrong way.

It ought to be treated by castration, honestly.

Oh, and look who is sniffing around the edges of this topic area over at the Wiktionary, our old buddy; https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Special: ... s_Advocate

I realize I am an outlier on this topic, but if they've already offended, this is too little, too late.

[Tarc]

I realize I am an outlier on this topic, but if they've already offended, this is too little, too late.

I'm a bit of an extra hardass on this topic, and IMO if they've dipped in the well once, they'll go back again eventually.

No one eats just one potato chip.

[Hemiauchenia]

I'm sympathetic to the views of Allyn Walker et al that paedophilia (the exclusive or primary sexual attraction to children regardless of whether they have offended or not) is a psychiatric disorder that ought to be treated by medical professionals but the swarm of SPAs surrounding this topic really rubs me the wrong way.

It ought to be treated by castration, honestly.

Indeed, both chemical and surgical castration are very effective at drastically reducing recividism among sex offenders https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3565125/, though chemical castration requires the ongoing injections of expensive drugs.