~    WHAT IS A PAEDOPHILE?     ~

Paedophilia is, within limits, a flexible concept. It can be normal behaviour or a perversion.; it can be a boon or a crime; it can be universal or a peculiarity; and it can be legal or illegal. Some definitions are fairly technical. 

In the first place, paedophilia's definition is primary an issue of theory, not merely classification, since classification implies a theory, no matter how rudimentary. Freund et at. (1984) used Latinesque words to classify sexual attraction along the dimensions of sex and age: 

[Page 12]

According to Levin and Stava (1987), 

"Pedophilic behavior is any sexual contact, forced or non-forced, between an adult and a minor" (p. 58), 

and they regard child molestation as a synonym for paedophilia. 

The term "child molester" is more usually regarded as a generic term for all who offend against underage persons: 

"Child molestation is defined as any sexual contact between an offender and a victim who, due to age and/or immaturity, is incapable either legally or realistically (because of lack of a true appreciation of the significance or consequence of the act of
giving consent. The specific sexual acts may range from mutual touching and fondling to actual intercourse, but access to the victim is achieved through pressure, coercion, or deception."  
(Hobson, Roland and Jamieson, 1985, p. 104) 

Inherent in the child molester/paedophile distinction is the belief that while some men are sexually/erotically fixated on underage people, there are circumstances uncharacteristically or intermittently engage in some form of sexual activity with children rather than with their usually preferred adult partners. Superficially, this may seem reasonable but may not bear close examination. 

Stylized case studies illustrate aspects of the problem: 

"Al is a 35-year-old man with a fantasy triggered by seeing a young girl with long blonde hair or by a magazine or television characterization of the same. He then imagines himself disrobing the girl and touching her hairless pubic area and nipple buds. He may masturbate to this fantasy or use it to become aroused enough to have intercourse with his wife. Acting out the fantasy with his stepdaughter led to his arrest." 
(Rowan, 1988a, p. 91) 

[Page 13]

"Carl is a 40-year-old man with a history of alcoholism and conflicts with his alcoholic wife. His oldest daughter had taken over care of the younger siblings and was his confidante. On one occasion, when drunk, Carl fondled his daughter," 
(Rowan, 1988a, p. 91) 

For Rowan, both of these men are clearly child molesters in that they had sexually assaulted a child. In question is whether both are truly paedophiles. Al is the archetypal paedophile of the two. His sexual fantasies centre around the physical characteristics of an underage female and, just as in Graham's case, sex with an adult woman is facilitated by fantasies of sex with a child. Carl is a doubtful case of paedophilia, according to Rowan. His scenario suggests that drink and his wife's inadequacies caused his single sexual assault on an underage child. 

While it is not beyond the bounds of possibility that Carl is a child molester rather than a paedophile, caution is appropriate. For example, if Carl, in similar circumstances, had fondled his friend George's penis, would we argue that he has no homosexual leanings? We know too little about Carl -- has he offended against any children outside of his family? Has he masturbated to thoughts of intercourse with an underage girl? Carl may be keen to present his crime as the result of the pressures of unfortunate circumstances. 

The problems of definition are even more difficult when we take Rowan's discussion of incest: 

"The socially unskilled or 'lazy' man need not look beyond his own home especially in the context of family and/or community acceptance of such behavior. A man may feel entitled to sex and dominant enough to demand that he need not go beyond the family for gratification. Typically, those men who are aroused by the seduction process rather than the sex itself will not often find that challenge in the family setting. Study of children at risk suggests that the adult male's lack of bonding to the young child because of absence through military service, work, travel, or incarceration might predispose that particular child to assault." 
(Rowan, 1988a, p. 93) 

To suggest that men do not have sex with children because of social bonding is palpable nonsense. If this were the case every man would have intercourse with any child with the exception of those with whom he has bonded. Relatively few men, as far as we can tell, have an erotic interest in children. In the light of this, it is probably safe to assume that this incestuous offender has an erotic interest in 

[Page 14]

underage children which motivates incestuous acts, rather than a bonding failure. 

In psychiatric classification, paedophilia is regarded as one of the sexual paraphilias alongside fetishes and sexual activity with animals. Homosexuality was, until relatively recently, regarded as a mental disorder in the standard American Psychiatric Association diagnostic manual. Gay Liberation not only had a significant impact on the decriminalization of much homosexual behaviour but also helped to define homosexuality as a lifestyle rather than a pathology. 

In the second Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of the American Psychiatric Association (DSM-II), homosexuality was classified as a sexual disorder but this changed with the third manual (DSM-111). Suppe (1991) suggests: 

"There is, in fact, good reason to suspect that the classification of sexual paraphilias as mental disorders is the codification of social mores. The historical record clearly shows that in issues such as masturbation, abortion and contraception, venereal disease, and the inferiority of women and blacks, physicians have generally supported the prevailing mores, presenting research that gave credence and medical-scientific legitimacy to social prejudices." 
(Suppe, 1991, p. 10) 

Support for these assertions can be found in Howitt (1992) and Howitt and Owusu-Bempah (1994) for child abuse and racism, respectively. 

Other curiosities abound in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual. For example, the diagnoses of zoophilia (sexual attraction to animals) and paedophilia are based on either overt activities or private fantasy. In contrast, fetishes, exhibitionism, voyeurism and masochism/sadism are recognized solely from overt activities. Thus, the person who can only be aroused sexually by thinking of sex with their next-door-neighbour's goat but never touches the animal may be suffering from the mental illness zoophilia. Apparently, someone who can only get sexually aroused by imagining that he is whipping his next door neighbour's naked body is normal! This reasoning appears to be quite arbitrary. The value of a psychiatric theory that classifies the fantasy-only paedophile as mentally disordered but not the fantasy-only exhibitionist is very much in doubt.

The way in which paedophilia is described has changed with fashions or developments in psychiatric thinking. In the first edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-I) 

[Page 15]

(American Psychiatric Association, 1952), it was listed as one of several "sexual deviations". Paedophilia was held to be sociopathic since the paedophile was at odds with society's mores, not just other individuals. Despite still being described as a "sexual deviation" in DSM-II, the notion of sociopathic disorder was abandoned and the categorization "non psychotic mental disorder" used instead (American Psychiatric Association, 1968). 

Later, paedophilia was listed as a member of the category "paraphilias" in DSM-III (American Psychiatric Association, 1980). Paedophilia was restricted to sexual activities between adults and pre-pubescent children or fantasy on this theme. Thus, adult sexual activity involving early adolescents is not classified as pedophilia:

"Many would find DSM-III's classification unduly narrow by virtue of excluding contact with pubescents and early adolescents and would disagree that '[i]solated sexual acts with children do not warrant the diagnosis of Pedophilia' (p. 271), and would further reject the idea that the acts must be 'a repeatedly preferred to exclusive method of achieving sexual excitement' (p. 272) in order to qualify them as a sexual disorder ." 
(Suppe, 1991, p. 24) 

The revision, DSM-III-R (American Psychiatric Association, 1987), abandoned the requirement "repeatedly preferred". A categorization of paedophilia was allowed even when the men showed sexual arousal to other stimuli, e.g. other paraphilias or adult-adult homosexual or heterosexual intercourse. Thus change accompanied a growing awareness that paedophilia is often associated with other sexual crimes and activities.

Also contentious is the extent to which paedophilia actually results in psychological disability:

"This investigation of the so-called 'sexual paraphilias' in DSM has reinforced the suspicion that they are not, per se, mental disorders, but rather constitute conflicts between an individual and society. Their inclusion in DSM-III is unwarranted, unscientific, and only serves to strengthen the conclusion that psychiatry has resorted to the codification of social mores while masquerading as an objective science. Indeed, even if this suspicion is incorrect, the burden of proof rests with psychiatry ." 
(Suppe, 1991, p. 26) 

But it needs to be stressed that Suppe wrote this in the context of a rare publication broadly favourable towards paedophile activity. 

[Page 16] 

Describing paedophilia as a paraphilia means that it is classified with sadism, exhibitionism,  voyeurism and other sexual practices that many regard as perversions. 

The key characteristics of paraphilia, are: 

The fantasy of paraphiliacs has its origins in childhood and adolescence. Ageing paraphiliacs frequently describe how certain erotic imagery has stayed with them for most of their lives. While some men have periodic episodes of paraphiliac fantasy, they usually claim that this started prior to or during adolescence. The sense of pressure to act out these erotic fantasies in real life varies greatly. Masturbation is commonly used to discharge the physical arousal caused by fantasy. Frequent masturbation can, in some individuals, severely interfere with normal daily life. Many paraphiliacs experience this sexual arousal as intrusive, occurring when not desired. They are rapidly aroused when imagery relevant to their fantasy is encountered in magazines, videos and elsewhere (Levine, Risen and Althof, 1990). 

Despite paedophilia being classified as a paraphilia, nothing should be assumed about its relationship with other paraphilias. Levine, Risen and Althof suggest that although changes from sadism to masochism, for example, are typical in the work experience of clinicians, switches from paedophilia to other paraphilias are uncommon. 

A study of adolescent offenders found that about half of them had committed two or more offences. Nevertheless, under a quarter of such multiple offenders offended in more than one category of sexual offences (Saunders, Awad and White, 1986). Switching between paedophilia, rape and exhibitionism was rare. About two-thirds of recidivists repeated the same type of offence.

Substantial differences are found between the legal, social and biological definitions of paedophilia. In Western society, definitions of childhood have been based largely on arbitrary dates, milestones marking progress into adulthood. Biological changes may not 

[Page 17]

correspond closely to these, and are insignificant in social and legal definitions. Childhood has been extended to leave a limbo time when the young person may be physically but not socially ready for reproduction: 

"At this point in our history, a very real conundrum exists for the researchers of adult/child sex ... what truly marks the point beyond which sexual interaction with a child is pathological and not just criminal?" 
(Ames and Houston, 1990, p. 339) 

It may be more appropriate or meaningful to classify paedophiles in terms of the biological characteristics of the child. Perhaps if the offender consistently opts for children who lack secondary sexual characteristics such as breasts or pubic hair then he should be classified as a paedophile; there is a distinction to be drawn between biological and socio-legal children. In girls, biological children have not started their periods (but the age of menarche varies between  cultures, individuals and historical period).  Similarly, boys undergo changes from the flat and slim boy-type to a maturer shape:

"Laws governing child molestation reflect this socio-legal- childhood, regardless of its discrepancy with biological childhood. This discrepancy has served to cloud what Should be a natural distinction between offender types, between child molestation and rape. By making this distinction, important differences between these populations will perhaps be found and the etiology of pedophilia will become more apparent." 
(Ames and Houston, 1990, pp. 340-341) 

For the purposes of this book, the word "paedophile" will be used as a generic name for sexual offenders against underage persons. At the same time it is acknowledged that this covers a multitude of sinners, perhaps not all of whom will have strong sexual desires towards underage persons. 

The advantages of using the term "paedophile" include its brevity compared to phrasal nouns such as "child sexual molester". It also adroitly avoids the conventional wisdom that there are types of sexual offenders against children who are not erotically orientated towards children. 

For example, incest offenders are commonly held to be different to "true" paedophiles, although this has not been proven and is in considerable doubt. One disadvantage is the connotations of child love, which may be anything but the truth. At times the terminology of other writers has to be adopted for stylistic 

[Page 18]

reasons, despite reservations about their choice of language. Doubtless, Okami and Goldberg (1992) would describe the proposed use of the term "paedophile" in their phrase "slippage" -- meaning that different researchers apply the term to vastly different phenomena such that it becomes very difficult to make meaningful comparisons between studies, or even to know what is meant by the trem. This may be regarded as sloppiness; it can also be seen as one of the central. things to understand in research and writings on child abuse -- how ideas can change to suit different purposes (Howitt, 1992).