Part III, Civil Commitment: "Excuse me, you honor, some judicial maturity, please

Published by EarlY

I have a PhD in literature and criticism and have taught literature, technical, and research writing for over 16 years. I am also a graduate student in social work in my final year. My focus area is with men that suffered past abuse, sex offending against children and with paraphilia. I will also complete my sex therapist certification by next year as well.

Join the Conversation

6 Comments

  1. Hi, I wanted to post a reply to one of your articles on The Baltimore Post Examiner but registration has been disabled.

    You said:

    >It is important to note that not all researchers agree on what clinical label to give those attracted to children. Dr. Michael Bailey prefers “child attracted” because many adults are attracted to minors. “Child” means younger, usually below 15, though I would say below 12 (but trust the more experienced researchers).

    Personally, I wouldn’t trust the CAMH team and related researchers. These people are not objective. They want to pathologise attraction to pubescent girls because it’s frowned upon in modern times. In ancient Rome the most common age girls were married off was about 14. If these researchers lived back then they’d be saying that it’s perfectly normal for men to find pubescent girls highly attractive and that it’s the natural human mating system for adult men and pubescent girls to pair up (which it actually is).

    Consider this.

    In his (2012?) paper on hebephilia Blanchard mentioned some reproductive statistics taken from the Pume tribe in the Amazon. They showed that girls who start reproducing before 14 had fewer surviving offspring than girls who started after 16. He claimed that these statistics show it would be a bad idea for Pume men to pick pubescent girls as wives. But what they really only show is that it’s a bad idea for girls to start reproducing in their pubescent years.

    The typical age girls in the Pume tribe start reproducing is about 15. In order to get as many offspring from a girl as possible Pume men need to claim them before 15 when they still have all their reproductive years ahead of them. This is exactly what we see happening. Pume girls are all married off and the men start having sex with them before 15. The Pume tribe are actually a perfect example of how adaptive hebephilic preferences can be. Whoops!

    Now, if these researchers were proper objective scientists they should be pleased to have this error pointed out so they can understand the human mating system better. But of course they won’t. They’ll desperately try and reject and ignore it because it conflicts with their ideology.

    https://baltimorepostexaminer.com/twitters-policy-toward-pedophiles-is-key-in-crime-prevention/2020/01/20

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Hi Brian, I agree that if we went with Blanchard, just about every hetero male would be pathologized. I do not support his research. And Bailey implies as much as you suggest. We also know since the 50s that men show arousal even to prepubescent girls though more arousal to older. I don’t think hebephilia is a disorder, but neither is pedophilia (only pedophilic disorder). I do agree that society has a very sex-negative approach and as I note in the Twitter article, many men look at young girls online legally. My thesis is that part of the reason that there is so much fear of “pedophiles” is that society thinks if people look at girls (or boys) that all of us will become pedophilies. Yes, people can be attracted to those underage because it’s not only about age or even development. There can be characteristics we find attractive regardless of age. Yes, in terms of attraction, little has changed from Ancient Rome until now, though we know more about brain development. But that does not mean there is not a reason, even biologically, to value one under age. That needs more explanation. This does not justify abuse, but there can still be attraction. Thank you.

      Like

      1. David Buss has a book coming soon about the “darker side of human mating”, as he puts it. He might talk about the male attraction to minors since he knows it’s common in primitive foraging societies for men to marry, have sex with, and kidnap girls well below 18.

        Like

      2. I will check the book out. A possible theory is that young girls have a lot of reproductive value, but most men, I think, would not harm them but would be attracted enough to help provide for them and not engage in damaging girls’ ability to reproduce later on. This is an area we could use more study in terms of understanding human behavior. Our current political environment makes such difficult.

        Like

      3. That’s the most likely theory, yes. The human mating system revolves around long-term relationships, not one-night stands. Men have evolved to prefer females who can give them the most offspring over the long-term, which are the young females who have all their reproductive years ahead of them.

        As Steven Pinker put it: “Ironically for the men-are-slime theory, an eye for nubile women may have evolved in the service of marriage and fatherhood, not one-night stands. Among chimpanzees, where a father’s role ends with copulation, some of the wrinkled and saggy females are the sexiest.”

        Like

Leave a comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: