Keyword: hebephilia

Seto, Michael C.; Pedophilia and Sexual Offending against Children
This new edition represents a critical review and integration of many active lines of research on pedophilia, hebephilia, sexual offending against children, incest, risk assessment, and treatment. My aim is to provide an accessible and scholarly book that summarizes the evidence to drive better research, policies, and practices, to prevent sexual offenses against children and to improve the lives of persons with pedophilia or hebephilia.

From this book, summaries and some quotes are published here:

< https://www.ipce.info/library/book/pedophilia-and-sexual-offending-against-children >
Seto, Michael C.; Pedophilia and Sexual Offending against Children - Theory, Asessment, and Intervention - Second Edition - Quotes and Summaries; 329 pp
This new edition represents a critical review and integration of many active lines of research on pedophilia, hebephilia, sexual offending against children, incest, risk assessment, and treatment. My aim is to provide an accessible and scholarly book that summarizes the evidence to drive better research, policies, and practices, to prevent sexual offenses against children and to improve the lives of persons with pedophilia or hebephilia.

Some readers may be surprised that helping persons with pedophilia or hebephilia is part of my aim in this book. I ask you to imagine, whatever your sexual preferences are, that social norms and laws prohibited you from expressing your sexuality in the way you would like. Very serious consequences could result if you did express your sexual interest, including loss of employment; social ostracism; estrangement from family and friends; long prison sentences; and then a range of legal restrictions regarding residence, movement, and public notifications about you post sentence. Even if you never expressed your sexual interest, you would live in anxiety and fear because of the severe stigma associated with your sexual interest, so that it would be very difficult if not impossible to disclose to family members, friends, and others around you. That is the situation that persons with pedophilia or hebephilia currently face.

The field seems to have moved from a vigorous debate about whether sex offender treatment works at all to more fine-rained questions about what forms of treatment, for who, and under what conditions. This does not negate the many questions regarding assessment and treatment
for different populations, including non-offending persons with pedophilia, females, and juveniles.

I hope this book is a useful starting point for researchers, practitioners, and policymakers in setting an agenda for further work on these important topics. I am looking forward to the next decade of progress.

Schuster, Filip; Every fifth boy and man is pedophilic or hebephilic, Sep 24 2014
Abstract

A meta-analysis of all seven relevant phallometric studies reveals that 22% of normal men show greater or equal sexual arousal to child stimuli (individuals up to 13 years old) than to adult stimuli.
Combined results of two of these studies reveal male prevalence rates of about 3% for pedophilia (mostly sexually aroused by prepubescents) and about 16% for hebephilia (mostly sexually aroused by pubescents). Details of these studies are described, and implications of the results for sexual science and society are discussed.
Rind, Bruce, & Yuill Richard; Hebephilia as Mental Disorder?; Archives of Sexual Behavior; 41(4), 797–829, Jun 28 2012
A Historical, Cross-Cultural, Sociological, Cross-Species, Non-Clinical Empirical, and Evolutionary Review

Blanchard et al. (2009) demonstrated that hebephilia is a genuine sexual preference, but then proposed, without argument or evidence, that it should be designated as a mental disorder in the DSM-5. A series of Letters-to-the-Editor criticized this proposal as a non sequitur. Blanchard (2009), in rebuttal, reaffirmed his position, but without adequately addressing some central criticisms.

In this article, we examine hebephilia-as-disorder in full detail. Unlike Blanchard et al., we discuss definitions of mental disorder, examine extensive evidence from a broad range of sources, and consider alternative (i.e., non-pathological) explanations for hebephilia.

We employed Wakefield's (1992b) harmful dysfunction approach to disorder, which holds that a condition only counts as a disorder when it is a failure of a naturally selected mechanism to function as designed, which is harmful to the individual in the current environment. We also considered a harmful-for-others approach to disorder (Brülde, 2007).

Examination of historical, cross-cultural, sociological, cross-species, non-clinical empirical, and evolutionary evidence and perspectives indicated that hebephilic interest is an evolved capacity and hebephilic preference an expectable distributional variant, both of which were adaptively neutral or functional, not dysfunctional, in earlier human environments. Hebephilia's conflict with modern society makes it an evolutionary mismatch, not a genuine disorder.
Though it should not be classified as a disorder, it could be entered in the DSM's V-code section, used for non-disordered conditions that create significant problems in present-day society.
Tromovitch, Philip; Manufacturing Mental Disorder by Pathologizing Erotic Age Orientation; Archives of Sexual Behavior; 2008(Publishe on line), , Oct 16 2008
Regrettably, [...]Blanchard et al. [2008] did not merely report on their research and draw appropriate conclusions. Instead, they recommended a potentially dramatic expansion or addition to the DSM diagnostic categories of mental disorders without any evidence or reasoning that those who would be newly included under the mental disorder rubric can be properly categorized as mentally disordered.

Blanchard et al. did not define mental disorder. They did not measure mental disorder. They did not examine associations with mental disorder. They did not provide reasoning that leads to a conclusion of mental disorder.
Bering, Jesse; Pedophiles, Hebephiles and Ephebophiles ..., Jul 01 2009
In this column presented by Scientific American Mind magazine, research psychologist Jesse Bering of Queen's University Belfast ponders some of the more obscure aspects of everyday human behavior. Ever wonder why yawning is contagious, why we point with our index fingers instead of our thumbs or whether being breastfed as an infant influences your sexual preferences as an adult? Get a closer look at the latest data as "bering in Mind" tackles these and other quirky questions about human nature.

"Michael Jackson probably wasn’t a pedophile — at least, not in the strict, biological sense of the word. It’s a morally loaded term, pedophile, that has become synonymous with the very basest of evils. (...) But according to sex researchers, it’s also a grossly misused term."
Allen Frances, MD, & Michael B. First MD; Hebephilia Is Not a Mental Disorder in DSM-IV-TR and Should Not Become One in DSM-5; Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law; 39(1), 78-85, Feb 01 2011
The paraphilia section of Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR) is being misinterpreted in the forensic evaluations of sexually violent offenders. The resulting misuse of the term paraphilia not otherwise specified, hebephilia, has justified the inappropriate involuntary commitment of individuals who do not in fact qualify for a DSM-IV-TR diagnosis of mental disorder. This article has two purposes: to clarify what the DSM-IV-TR was meant to convey and how it has been twisted in translation within the legal system, and to warn that the DSM-5 proposal to include pedohebephilia threatens to make the current bad situation very much worse in the future.
Kramer, Richard; APA Guidelines Ignored in Development of Diagnostic Criteria for Pedohebephilia, Oct 30 2010
This Letter describes how the proposed DSM-5 criteria for pedohebephilia
have been developed without following four key guidelines specified by the American Psychiatric Association (APA) and to point out significant flaws that have resulted. It also proposes solutions.

The failures described above have resulted in serious flaws
in the proposed diagnostic criteria - Kramer mentions five flaws.

There are significant ethical consequences of the above
failures.

The APA and the paraphilias subworkgroup have an intellectual
and ethical responsibility to promote valid research and
to counter rather than reinforce false stereotypes.

There are steps they can take to fulfill this responsibility - follow five points.
Green, Richard; Hebephilia is a Mental Disorder?
The proposed inclusion of a hebephilic sexual orientation (early pubescent males and/or females) in DSM-5 compromises the scientific credibility of psychiatry. Moralism about the age of an acceptable sexual partner drives this proposal. It ignores common patterns of sexual arousal, cultural variability, and historic precedents. It blurs the domains of psychiatry and law. The age of sexual consent is 14 in much of Europe. An example of the new "mentally disordered" would be a 19 year old with a consenting 14 year old. Where sexual interaction is legally accepted, but pathologized as mental disorder, psychiatry attempts to act as an agent of social control.
Franklin, Karen; Hebephilia : Quintessence of Diagnostic Pretextuality; Behavioral Sciences and the Law; (online),
Hebephilia is an archaic term used to describe adult sexual attraction to adolescents. Prior to the advent of contemporary sexually violent predator laws, the term was not found in any dictionary or formal diagnostic system. Overnight, it is on the fast track toward recognition as a psychiatric condition meriting inclusion in the upcoming ?fth edition of the em>Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. This article traces the sudden emergence and popularity of hebephilia to pressure from the legal arena and speci?cally to the legal mandate of a serious mental abnormality for civil commitment of sex offenders. Hebephilia is proposed as a quintessential example of pretextuality, in which special interests promote a pseudoscienti?c construct that furthers an implicit, instrumental goal. Inherent problems with the construct’s reliability and validity are discussed. A warning is issued about unintended consequences if hebephilia or its relative, pedohebephilia, make their way into the DSM-5, due out in 2013. Copyright 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Franklin, Karen; The Public Policy Implications of ‘‘Hebephilia’’: A Response to Blanchard et al. (2008); Archives of Sexual Behavior; 38, 319-320, Oct 16 2008
Blanchard et al. (2008) present their article on "hebephilia" as an objective analysis of research data. In fact, it is a textbook example of subjective values masquerading as science. Avoiding the crucial public policy implications of their argument, Blanchard et al. advance hebephilia as if it exists in a cultural vacuum. Their recommendations are even more troubling in light of their study's methodological flaws.
Blanchard, Ray, Lykins Amy D., Wherrett Diane, Kuban Michael E., Cantor James M., Blak Thomas, et al.; Pedophilia, hebephilia, and the DSM-V; Archives of Sexual Behavior; 38, 335-350
The present study sought to validate the concept of hebephilia by examining the agreement between self-reported sexual interests and objectively recorded penile responses in the laboratory.
[...]
These results indicated that hebephilia exists as a discriminable erotic age-preference.
The authors recommend various ways in which the DSM might be altered to accommodate the present findings. One possibility would be to replace the diagnosis of Pedophilia with Pedo-hebephilia [...].