John, if you have not been following the story and its ramifications, then please tell me why it “seems to be ongoing?” Because what this article was attempting to do was to provide a narrative of an incident that occurred between CG and one of its writers. The only debate that has occurred on this issue has been between a few self identified pedophiles who state they are committed to non offending, and a number of other people who have taken issue with the way they attempt to do that, the general authenticity of their claims, and their enormous lack of sensitivity to those who may have been hurt or potentially triggered by this discussion.
No one is debating orientation vs disorder, or organic vs deviancy / pathological, or anything else regarding the factors that may be responsible for the condition. Yes, those debates are ongoing within academia, however in this case they have not been part of the discussion. I’m quite aware you are not especially fond of scholarly work, but your swipe at it is not warranted here. In fact the only obscuring of the issue occurs when you chime in with an overly simplistic theory suggesting that a pedophiles inability to sustain healthy adult sexual relationships is the reason they target children. An idea popular in psychiatric textbooks of perhaps three decades ago, that theory is not part of the current discourse in any meaningful way. Even if it was, it is not, nor will it be part of the discussion here as we are not debating the scientific origins of pedophilia, nor how or if it can be treated.
If you have something relevant to contribute that falls within the parameters of the discussion as I have outlined it above, please do so. If not, please refrain from commenting in this discussion as you are obscuring what has been a long, emotional, and challenging situation for all involved. Disagreements and debates to what I’ve just said, will not be entertained.