The Stigmatization Of Pedophilia

I pointed out in my first article that pedophilia and child molestation are not one and the same. That, in fact, most pedophiles don’t molest children, and conversely, most child molesters aren’t pedophiles. However, most people keep conflating pedophilia and child molestation, and they simply can’t wrap their minds around the idea of a pedophile that doesn’t actively seek sex with children or of someone that isn’t attracted to children actually having sex with one. Yet, no matter how hard it is for people to wrap their minds around these facts, it doesn’t make them any less true. The great thing about the truth is that it’s true whether you believe in it or not.

It is understandable, however, that most people still think they are one and the same. After all, most people haven’t really thought about the issue to any degree of depth. It is an uncomfortable topic, so they’d rather not think about it. If they read a news article about a case of child sexual abuse, they feel disgust and rage — and rightfully so — against the perpetrator, and they can’t imagine why anyone would have sex with a child if they weren’t sexually attracted to her.

In addition, the media doesn’t really help — and in fact is highly responsible for the conflation of the two concepts, particularly English-speaking media outlets. Some languages differentiate between pedophilia (the sexual attraction to prepubescent children) and pederasty — the act of having sex with children, regardless of the age and gender of the child, which while not technically accurate according to the meaning of the word (pederasty described a relationship between an adult man and a pubescent boy in Ancient Greece) at least gives us a term different than pedophilia to refer to those who have actually abused a child, and news organizations are careful to use the right term.

But in English-speaking media, it is common to see the term pedophile used as a synonym to the term child sexual abuser or child molester. Thus, you read statements like ‘convicted pedophile’ or ‘convicted of pedophilia’. However, if you take to the actual meaning of the words pedophilia and pedophile, statements like these make no sense whatsoever. Imagine a news headline about a man charged with the rape a woman saying ‘the convicted heterosexual’ or ‘man convicted for heterosexuality’. Now, whether pedophilia can be considered a sexual orientation or not is a matter for another post, but in the context of using proper language for these articles, it’s analogous. Being sexually attracted to children (or to anything, for that matter) is not illegal. Pedophilia is not an action, and thus pedophilia cannot — and should not — be illegal, so no one is ‘convicted of pedophilia’, but rather of child sexual abuse.

Unfortunately, using this language irresponsibly for decades has had its effect, and the idea that pedophile is synonymous with child molester has permeated society’s collective consciousness so much that they have essentially become one and the same in most people’s minds. And when you try to point out their incorrect use of the language, they accuse you of playing word games.

Ironic, isn’t it? Seems to me the only word games people are playing are the ones intended to paint all pedophiles as predatory monsters.

Trying to point out their irresponsibility to media organizations, additionally, seems like a futile effort. Somewhat recently, a pedophile submitted a complaint to the BBC about their incorrect use of the term pedophile. Their response?

«To address your concern, the word ‘paedophile’ does have today a different meaning from its pure dictionary definition. We are aware of the clinical nature of the term; however, in common usage, ‘paedophile’ has become synonymous with ‘child sex offender’. As this usage has gradually pervaded other media, it has also understandably spread to the BBC. The issue has been discussed at high levels within the BBC, and the view is that while we could resist this change, that is unlikely to make much difference regarding its wider usage. There is also a feeling that it’s not the BBC’s job to preserve the language, but to reflect changes in it.»

While they do have a point that languages evolve and adapt over time to the use societies make of words, I believe in this case the BBC is being irresponsible in their use of language. People used stigmatizing and offensive words like queer or faggot to refer to homosexuals decades ago, but responsible news organizations did not simply go along with these changes, but rather challenged them and refused to use the stigmatizing and offensive language. I believe it is the ethical responsibility of news and media organizations to use language properly, especially when the misuse has the effect of stigmatizing an entire population of — until proven guilty — innocent people. Whenever they incorrectly use language, it reaches an audience of thousands, if not millions, of people, and it only contributes to the perpetuation of the stigma. Equating pedophilia with child molestation is casting an entire group of human beings in the role of criminals — essentially dehumanizing them. If this was being done about any other social group, people would go up in arms and take the streets, and news organizations would not bend to the corruption of language. But I guess pedophiles are fair game. The fact is, the BBC should be deeply ashamed of their usage of the word pedophilia and the response they provided to the complaint submitted by a concerned pedophile who felt offended by their usage of the term.

The continuous conflation of pedophilia and child molestation has another very important consequence: young pedophiles growing up and coming to terms with their attraction often repeatedly hear this message and internalize it at a subconscious level. They grow up in despair, thinking they are bound to sexually abuse a child at some point in their lives, because they have never heard about a pedophile that has never molested a child, and every time they see the word pedophile being used is to refer to those who have sexually abused children. Stigma fosters shame, and the pedophile will feel that he has no one and nowhere to turn to, and no role models to look up to. He will be driven into hiding, and forced to cope with his sexual attraction alone, afraid to seek support, or finding the wrong kind of resources online. His internalized belief that he is nothing but a potential child molester, a ticking time bomb, could easily become a self-fulfilling prophecy. This is, ultimately, not in the best interest of the pedophile, society or children.

In addition, it’s not just law-abiding pedophiles who advocate for the use of proper language. Most actual experts in the fields of sexuality, psychiatry and child sexual abuse recognize the distinction between feelings — pedophilia — and actions — child molestation — and stress the importance of differentiating between the two. We’re talking about people like James Cantor, Michael Seto, Fred Berlin, Ray Blanchard, Sarah Goode or Elizabeth Letourneau — all names that are easy to look up. No one is trying to deny that there are indeed some pedophiles who do go on to abuse children, but to automatically assume that every pedophile is a child molesters is as incorrect as to automatically assume that every heterosexual man is a woman rapist.

In summary, and in spite of the BBC’s feelings on the matter, the correct use of language matters, especially when the misuse of said language stigmatizes innocent people. If we are to progress anything as a society in the way we deal with people who are sexually attracted to children, in hopes of helping them realize that they can live a life without sexually abusing children — and thus help prevent child sexual abuse — we urgently need to change the way we talk about it, and we need to stop using terminology that only helps perpetuate the stigma through the conflation of feelings and actions. People should be judged for their actions, and not for feelings they did not choose and cannot change.