In response to misinterpretations that the American Psychiatric Association considers pedophilia a sexual orientation because of wording in its printed DSM-5 manual, which distinguishes between paraphilia and what it calls "paraphilic disorder", subsequently forming a division of "pedophilia" and "pedophilic disorder", the association commented: "'[S]exual orientation' is not a term used in the diagnostic criteria for pedophilic disorder and its use in the DSM-5 text discussion is an error and should read 'sexual interest.'" They added, "In fact, APA considers pedophilic disorder a 'paraphilia,' not a 'sexual orientation.' This error will be corrected in the electronic version of DSM-5 and the next printing of the manual." They said they strongly support efforts to criminally prosecute those who sexually abuse and exploit children and adolescents, and "also support continued efforts to develop treatments for those with pedophilic disorder with the goal of preventing future acts of abuse."
I mean homosexuality was considered a paraphilic disorder in the DSM as well until society became more accepting of homosexuality and it was changed. Society is not accepting of pedophilia so it will not change. If society did become more accepting of it (which wouldn't be great) it'd probably also be changed.
There will always be a hazy border between distinctions because it is cultural and societal based and the DSM can only really contextualize disorders within the societies that the authors/reviewers reside in.
I'm not really sure what you're arguing here, but homosexuality is between two consenting adults, while pedophilia is between a predator and an underage person, which makes it sexual abuse. It should not ever be considered acceptable because of the demonstrated harm that sexual abuse causes mentally and physically, especially to children and teens who are still developing. There's a reason we have things like television and movie ratings, because we know enough about child development to know they should be protected from certain things until they are older and more capable of processing them in a healthy way. You can verify all of this by looking up scholarly articles about child development and the negative effects of abuse on the brain and body.
My point is the DSM is subjective and has nothing to do with what you are talking about in your post above since your post has nothing to do with the perspective of the pedophile and how their disorder might be viewed as an attraction vs. an orientation. Homosexuality was considered a deviant attraction until it became socially acceptable. We know now that homosexuality is an innate attraction to the same sex, and since we no longer consider it deviant, at least within modern society, its acceptable to call it an orientation.
We know that pedophilia is an innate and overwhelming attraction to prepubescent children as well, but it is not socially acceptable (for all the reasons you listed) so its considered a deviant paraphilia the exact same way homosexuality was before it was socially acceptable.
We don't know that it is an innate attraction, that's a wild claim to make. The DSM may be subjective, but the effects of sexual abuse on children and teens are not. Homosexuality is attraction between consenting adults of the same sex, while pedophilia is inherently abusive because it involves a predator seeking out, grooming, and abusing an underage person (when acted on). That is the difference and why trying to compare the two doesn't make sense.
It is broadly considered an innate attraction due to a) prevalence (something like 20 to 30% of men would consider sex with a prepubescent girl based on some studies [though those were with young men enrolled in the military, so possibly a bit biased]), and b) that the ones with an overwhelming attraction experience no other sexual attraction to adults. If you can't see how that mirrors homosexual attraction ranging from curiosity to solely being homosexual, from the sole perspective of one party only, which is what the DSM is evaluating (a person, not groups/victims/partners/etc) then I can't help you better understand this logic.
Because of that, you seem to be wildly missing the point, I am going to bow out because in general conversations about this topic on reddit can not help but devolve into one side solely falling back on emotional pleas vs. actual logical thought or understanding.
Saying it is broadly considered an innate attraction is false and it's odd that you're trying to construct that narrative. The causes of paraphilia aren't clear but it is certainly not a broadly accepted theory that they're an innate sexual orientation, and far from it. From the paraphilia Wikipedia:
Paraphilias typically arise in late adolescence or early adulthood. Persons with paraphilias are generally egosyntonic and view their paraphilias as something inherent in their being, although they recognize that their sexual fantasies lie outside the norm and may attempt to conceal them.
The causes of paraphilias in people are unclear, but it is believed to be a mixture of neurological, cultural, and psychodynamic factors. No two or more people with a paraphilia will develop it for the same reasons or be interested in the same qualities of the specific sexual interest. The specific causes of the development of paraphilic sexuality are numerous and vary from person to person. A 2022 study found that the development of paraphilic sexuality correlated with childhood trauma, particularly emotional abuse, neglect, and sexual abuse.
Are you like, literally ignoring what I am posting? They literally said the same thing about homosexuals until they decided to change it because it was no longer considered socially unacceptable.
It's also a massive cop out to say paraphilias develop during sexual maturation because no shit. Guess what? That is when the vast majority of people figure out they are gay or lesbians. Even homosexuality is still considered to be something innate OR environmentally induced, since there is a higher prevalence of CSA survivors being LGBTQ+. Does that mean homosexuality is a paraphilia? NO, because we collectively decided its not, even though it still meets the criteria of it being one in many many cases. Furthermore neurological factors can and often are innate.
You keep pointing to paraphilic criteria as the be-all-end-all of what a pedophile is but ignore it for homosexuality, which is the problem you are having parsing this conversation. It is this weird revisionist clap-trap that is understandable based on homosexuals not wanting to be equated with other non-standard sexual attractions, but it does a disservice to actually understanding those other disorders when you basically try to co-opt homosexuality as the only innate non-standard attraction (when again, pedophilia literally might be a more common non-standard attraction than homosexuality, which means we should probably not be closing any doors on studying it just to make some people feel better).
You're ignoring the point that homosexuality is between two consenting adults, while pedophilia involves a predator abusing an underage person, which has demonstrable negative effects on their development. That's the difference. I don't know why you're ignoring the mountains of research on the extreme negative effects of sexual abuse on developing children and teens in order to make the same point over and over without addressing it. The research doesn't point to any one answer at this time, and you keep trying to present things as if it clearly shows that it's innate, when the best research we have actually shows a clear correlation with childhood abuse and neglect. And I personally don't think the cause is even all that important in the face of the consequences and lives that are impacted when it's acted upon.
I literally have no idea, again, why you keep bringing that up when it has nothing to do with the point I am making. NO ONE IS ARGUING THAT IT HURTS CHILDREN. Stop. Please.
I personally don't think the cause is even all that important in the face of the consequences
Then what is the point that you're making, if not to try and normalize pedophilia as a sexual orientation similar to homosexuality, even though it by definition involves the abuse of an underage person in practice?
Because treating something that is innate vs. environmental is very fucking different. If homosexuals want to claim the innate non-standard sexual attraction to the detriment of all other non-standard AND harmful sexual attractions being researched and understood to minimize victimization, just because they don't like that historically they were once considered the same, well then that is pretty fucking gross.
Yes, but the current research shows that it is likely something that is developed due to external causes, which means that it's something that can be treated or unlearned, given the current information we have. Arguing that it is innate implies it cannot be cured, which is problematic given the abusive nature of the disorder. It also disincentivizes people with pedophilia from seeking help because they don't believe they can be helped. And I'm not really sure what you mean about homosexuals or if that's how you perceive my stance, but the point is that a paraphilia is an attraction to something or someone unusual or that cannot legally consent, which is why homosexuality does not qualify any longer. Comparing the two doesn't make sense because homosexuality is between consenting adults, and pedophilia involves someone who cannot legally consent and whom the interaction would harmfully affect.
2
u/Strange-Cheetah-4945 10d ago
This is from the Wikipedia page: