1. What research exists on pedophiles who were *not* themselves victims of molestation? Yes, I know (and I can intellectually "understand" how that kind of trauma can stunt a developing psyche, causing the victim to act out the role of their own abuser) that many abusers were once victims, but surely, many were not? If childhood trauma doesn't "explain" the deviant behavior, is there another explanation?

(It always troubles me, that truism about abusers being former victims, as if a victim of child molestation has been bitten by a metaphorical werewolf or vampire. I know plenty of victims who worry they will repeat the violence done to them as children, even though they have no sexual attraction to children, and, IMHO, are perfectly "normal" sexual beings. Perhaps more focus on individuals who were not once victims might relieve one anxious burden from the survivors).

2. What research exists of pedophiles being "cured"? I know much research indicates the high rates of recidivism with this behavior, but are there staistically significant instances where the desire for prepubescent boys or girls can be replaced for sexual desire for adult men or women, making children "safe" around a former molester?

(If it can be "cured" under what circumstances? And if it can't, does lifetime w/o parole really seem unjustified, or "fantasy-land" as one poster accueed?)

"I think the emphasis on domination and control is a red herring. "

"It's just like an ordinary courtship. And ordinary sex, for that matter. It's just that the victim cannot decline. They must not only tolerate the sex, they must accept the courtship and even act grateful for it, "

These 2 ideas sound diametrically opposed to me. It's not about control and domination, except the victim must submit to the perp?

As to pedophilia being an orientation, ... this makes me extremely uncomfortable. If it is an "orientation," is it something society should legitimize? Is it another "alternative lifestyle" like homosexuality? Can we accept one without the other? If pedophilia were "tolerated" would there be less crime against children? It's hard for me to even wruite these questions without screaming "No, no no!"

I accept homosexuality as a legitimate sexual orientation, because people involved are consenting adults (or teens). Pedophilia, by its very nature, is about desiring someone who can't consent, who can't be an "equal" in the "relationship." And, say a pedophile has a "relationship" with a young child. What happens when that child becomes an adult? Would the pedophile still desire them? Or, would they move on to the next child? And while I (like many) believe that being in a homosexualy tolerant society, being desired by a gay person, even experimenting with gay sex, doesn't "make" one gay, there seems to be quyite a bit o evidence that being molested as a child *can* twist one's sexuality away from "normal" sexual orientation (pedophiles as former victims again).

Wouldn't this be more like a "fetish", in the Freudian sense? And since this fetish invariably harms the object (yes, most victims of child sexual abuse grow up to live rewarding and healthy lives, they still have been harmed), shouldn't it remain taboo?

But any person who says "Tell anyone and I'll hurt you" or anything along those lines, is consciously using fear to exert control. Even if they think they love their victim.

While not every child molester will say this exact line, but I suspect such coersive use of fear (terror) is more common than not.

Many children who are abused suffer PTSD-like symptoms: they don't sleep well; they are hyper-sensitive to trigger sights, sounds, smells and contexts, etc.; they can become severely depressed; they can become violent when frightened into that victim-state.

I think it's dismissive to ignore the inherent vulnerability of childhood. Why are pedophiles attracted to prepubescent children, instead of little people, or young-looking adolescents and adults? The innocence, the impressionability, the mallealableness of childhood is as attractive as big eyes in large skull with short torso and short limbs. For many pedophiles, grown-ups are unattractive because they have agency, as wellas body hair and mature secondary sexual characteristics. And for pedophiles who were victims as young children, the repeating of their own ritual trauma is certainly a way to regain the control they lost as children.

While I grant that this is probably not true 100% of the time, to say it's not important, or off the mark, is dangerous. How many pedophiles have killed their victims, rather than risk exposure? How can that not be about control? Even if the abuser would never recognize it as such?

they haven't broken through yet, but last season's Project Runway featured 15 models from NY agencies. Judging by their pictures, I see 6 "caucasian" models (2 redheads, 2 blondes, 2 brunettes, all with very pale skin); 2 "olive-toned" models (latina or mediterranean); 2 "asian" models (sino-japanese); and 5 "of color" (african, arabice or south asian heritage) models.

Looks like the diversity is on Bravo, if not the cover of Vogue.

" It's not, "If I do X, this person will be scared into giving me Y, and having someone afraid enough of me to do Y is great!""

Except when it is.

There are plenty of pedophiles (and non-pedophile rapists/abusers too) who get off on the fear of their victim. The fear, the begging, the freezing in terror, the passing out from fear, the struggling, the screaming turns them on.

Proof? Well, anecdotally, I'm reading "Girls of a Tender Age" by MaryAnn Tirone Smith, a memoir about 1950's working-class Hartford, and the serial child molester Robert Malm. He routinely snatched little girls and teens, choked them, oh yeah, molested them, attempted to rape them, ejaculated, and threatened to kill them if they told. He murdered his last victim by tying her scarf so tightly round her neck she couldn't breathe. For him, it wasn't fun if they weren't choking. And, oh yeah leftychris, he never penetrated them with his penis. He "just touched them."

As for the rest of your argument, I'm going to respectfully continue to disagree with you.