Savage Love

Another Gold-Star Pedophile


So did everyone else picture their own grandma gettin' spanking with a leather belt?

Just me?

Right. I'll let myself out.

CWIA: You really, really, really need to consider having yourself castrated. Will it take away your sex drive? Yes. But it'll make it less likely that you'll want to fuck kids. Small price to pay for safety, yes?
Does Only Kinky's Dom realize he was roleplaying? Or is he actually abusive and she just has amazing coping skills.
I'm a regular SLOG commenter who's not gonna use my regular handle for this comment.

Dan, RE: your first letter, you are a brave, brave writer for tackling this issue & showing some compassion for people like this who have nowhere else to turn.

To CWIA/LW #1: I dated a man who was a GSP (gold star pedophile) for 5 years. Didn't know he was at first; we were able to maintain a normal - a little kinky, no age roleplay - sex life until about almost-4 years in. But we'd fight when it came to greater intimacy, we couldn't live together, etc. & one day I told him, you need to level with me or I'm gone..& he did. It seemed clear he's struck out socially when he was super young, & was traumatized by an abusive stepmom, & so his longing just kind of froze there, at the age he was when that happened.

After a week apart to sort through it all & some tears, I stood by him. He had never (& would never) acted on his desires & clearly was in the process of trying to rewire himself. I have a very adult shape, the opposite of prepubescent. We agreed he'd get some confidential counseling & try again.

He'd reached out & not had his trust betrayed, but he couldn't go the rest of the distance. He never got professional help & caved in to his depression. We broke up.

Rather than get the help he needed, he now lives w/ a roommate & doesn't date. He's a dear person, kind, bright, etc. If he had any contact with young children I'd feel like I had to tell his family, but he doesn't. So he's safe, but sad & lonely.

Don't let this happen to you. Don't be him, so scared of therapy, of someone judging you, that you never get the help you need to lead a happy & fulfilled life. Good for you for finally taking a chance & asking for some guidance: follow through. Take all the legal cautionary steps outlined above, keep yourself away from young boys & check your head. You can re-route your drive with the right help. I believe this, I started to see it happen in my ex. It was, when he was trying, as if the weight of the world was lifted from his shoulders.

I don't think castration is the only answer.

I know the loins want what they want, but try switching out your own fantasies & porn when you masturbate. Age the objects of your fantasies, or, you don't get to get off.

Stop hating yourself.

Want to change more than anything.

I wish you luck & strength.

@2 --

IIRC, castration actually has very little productive effect (where "productive" is defined as "making the person in question less likely to molest children"). At the moment, the best option even for the ideal case (i.e. a pedophile who recognizes that sexual attraction to children is a problem and shouldn't be acted on, and who's willing to seek therapy to resolve those problems or, failing that, at least develop strategies to avoid acting on pedophilic urges, e.g. CWIA) is less than ideal -- it's about finding strategies of therapy to prevent potential offenders from becoming actual offenders. We don't have a cure yet -- but it looks like therapy and coaching are currently more effective than castration at preventing a shift to "actual offender" status. (And for any aspiring psychologists who are reading -- if you can, in the course of your research and/or clinical career, find a reliable way to keep potential child molesters from becoming actual child molesters, you'll be providing a great service to humanity. Just saying.)
#2, I know that there's a lot at stake here, but castration isn't a "small price to pay".
CWIA's letter makes me sad. Here's a man who needs help, but our system can do nothing until he offends. As society has become more rabid about children's safety, we have cut off what little aid men like him must have to not harm children.
Yet for all of society's rabidity today, almost no Catholic priest pedophiles are prosecuted, some (many?) innocent men's lives have been destroyed by witch hunts, young men who've been convicted of statutory rape are ruined even if it was consensual, and men who have paid for their crimes are in a type of Scarlet Letter prison for the rest of their lives that (to me) violates the Constitution's prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment.
Why can't the greatest country on earth figure out a reasonable solution that both protects children AND provides help to potential offenders before they offend? Doesn't seem that hard, yet here we are. Pathetic.
@6, re @2: The idea of CWIA---or anyone--- getting castrated doesn't sound like a "small price to pay" to me, either, and I'm a het female!
@7: I agree-- it is sad!

WhewEEEEEEEE! I'm going to have one wild party when my reproductive years are finally and mercifully over!
Dan, what a compassionate, humane reply to CWIA.

CWIA, best of luck to you, and I hope you recognize what a brave achievement it is for you to make it this far.
CWIA, a family physician I know once worked with someone like you who agreed to be chemically castrated. Between the medication and therapy, the urge was reduced to almost nothing. Worth looking into.
Dan, excellent answer to CWIA, not so much to OK. Sooner or later Dan, you are going to have to accept the fact that just because something seems like kinky sex-play to you, it doesn't mean that's what it is to the parties involved. Almost everyone who lives in a 24/7 D/s relationship doesn't view it as "role play", to them it's simply a matter of being themselves, and you reducing their way of life to "sex play" is derogatory and condescending and makes you sound like a bit of a jackass. I know you can do better then that.
@4, I read your story with the greatest interest, and you indeed offer CWIA some hope. With some luck he will find inspiration in it.

@9(TheLuciferPerson), I think what is really commendable in CWIA's moral strength is that he is not trying to deceive himself at this point. When you have a desire that is considered despicable by society, avoiding it is a first idea that most people afflicted with this desire will try it. But as time goes by, this gets more and more difficult. The strongest temptation, slowly building up almost impossible to resist, is to lie to oneself and believe there is 'some situation' in which one's desires can be indulged without harm. All kinds of ideas and rationalizations will come to mind ('society is wrong! this isn't really always harmful! I will be realllyyy careful when I do it, there'll be no harm! I'll follow Dan Savage's campsite rule! There must be some way of doing it!'). And as your hunger builds up, the idea of not raping someone -- which when you're OK with yourself is a no-brainer -- begins to become more attractive ('it won't be rape rape! some kids already know about sex and liked it! I've read about this 8-year-old who masturbates! he/she will enjoy it too! I'll be nice! we'll start by playing games, he/she will enjoy it, hey maybe he/she will want to do it again! that's not rape rape is it?'). As things get worse, you start projecting your own desires on others, and children will kinda seem to be asking for it already, every time they do something that has a sexual co-text (and in our culture this is not so difficult to find: all children have to do to sound vaguely sexual is immitate grownups).

It is indeed awfully hard. I really pity CWIA, and I hope he'll somehow manage to have the strength not to ever harm a child.

But will he ever be happy in his future relationships?

Why should a merciful god create people with desires for love, sex and intimacy of a kind that makes sure they will never happen? I prefer to think that this is not so, that things (societies and/or desires) can change. But I really don't know.
@13, sure, and that is true (to some D/s relationships; you're also overgeneralizing here, since there are plenty of D/s people who do view their D/s as games and fun, not 'who they truly are'). But I think what Dan was trying to get at is that a good D/s relationship is not really abusive, and this is not easy to explain to non-D/s people unless there seems to be 'fun-'n'-games' somewhere for non-D/s people to relate to.

In the case of OK, now that her daughter has seen something but drawn the wrong conclusion, this indeed has to be changed -- or else OK's boyfriend will carry the stigma (at least in the eyes of OK's daughter) and OK will have to see her grandchildren alone. So I think Dan is right: her only choice is to be sincere with her daughter and start a conversation that begins somewhere around 'fun-'n'-games' and may go on (or not) towards 'true selves.' Perhaps even including her boyfriend in the conversation.
I LOVE *most* of the responses to CWIA! I mean it REALLY really really does take a whole hell of a lot to control ANY urge. Cocaine, xbox, booze, kids..any predilection.

DO NOT get castrated because somebody knew someone else's cousin's sister's bbf's neighbor's doctor that is just crazy. Follow Savage's sage advice or move to Canada.

Best of luck!,

A child of sexual abuse
@13 It's all very well, but people who witness these exchanges should not be expected to just understand what's going on. If you don't want to explain yourselves to anyone, you really have to tone it down in front of other people.
I don't think Dr. Cantor understand US mandatory reporting laws. I am a licensed psychologist, and I have practiced in 3 states. I am required to report abuse if I have reasonable suspicion that it has occurred, or if my client identifies a particular person he or she plans to abuse. I may NOT report a person for having general urges to abuse a particular class of people. Please don't dissuade people from getting help by misrepresenting what the laws are.
@#1 I didn't before but now I am so thanks for that.
I love that CWIA's handle sounds like Archie Bunker saying, "queer".
When a religious woman is submissive to her husband, everyone says she's being brainwashed. Why is this that different? The religious woman will tell you she's happy.
Seconding #18 (Dr. M)-- I think Dr. Cantor has some wrong ideas about mandatory reporting in the US. In both states where I've been licensed as a psychologist (Texas and Massachusetts) you're legally required to report if a specific child has been abused, or if you're afraid for the safety of a specific child. If someone just says they feel attracted to children, but hasn't acted on it and there are no specific children at risk, we're REQUIRED to keep that CONFIDENTIAL (unless we're subpoena'd by a judge). A psychotherapist may have his/her own biases, so may be more or less helpful, but should NOT automatically report someone just for saying they are sexually attracted to children.

That said... it may, unfortunately, take a little bit of shopping around to find a therapist with whom you can work on this. You want to find someone with whom you feel fairly comfortable. I second Dr. Cantor's recommendation for referrals, and the idea of checking in with the therapist about their views over the phone before coming in for a first session-- that can save time, money, and discouragement.

Very best of luck! I'm not sure that there are any real ways to change a hard-wired sexual desire, but I know there are ways of coming to better terms with yourself, overcoming self-hatred, learning strategies for easier self-control, and making your healthy adult relationships stronger and more satisfying.
Okay, rereading it, Dr. Cantor said it correctly, my apologies. I just want to emphasize his latter point-- that just being attracted to children, when you don't have children in your care, is NOT something a therapist must report, and IS something a therapist should keep confidential.
How is the advice to CWIA any different from the religious right's advice to gay men everywhere to get therapy to change their orientation so that they'll become attracted to women, or if that's not possible, to be able to live with a woman without actively seeking the company of men, or if that's not possible, just to abandon the "homosexual lifestyle" and stay away from the temptation of having sex with men?
@24, it's not really different, but the consequences are.

The problem with the religious right's advice to gay men is that gay men do not inherently scar and traumatize those they choose to sleep with and form relationships with. They demonize an orientation that is, by all evidence available, harmless, which shames them and encourages more gay people to stay in the closet--all for no reason. It hurts people unnecessarily. I'm sure you know this.

Telling pedophiles to steer clear of children and maintain other relationships perhaps saves the lives of dozens or, in awful cases, hundreds of children.

So that's what's different.
I can't believe WOW thinks Dan gave "awesome advice" to Heartbroken, who, IMO, got what she asked for by encouraging her husband to get naked with another woman and then felt "betrayed" by his penetrating the woman after he told his wife he wouldn't. It never would have happened if she hadn't set him up.

Plus, Dan didn't give her ANY advice; instead, he inappropriately and misguidedly wrote an endless ranting diatribe to the husband, who never even asked Dan for his advice or opinion. Just ridiculous.
The difference, Crinoline (@24) is bloody obvious:
Gay men seek consensual sex and love with adults. Pedophiles by their nature and the law are not seeking consensual sex. If they act on their desires, they risk doing lasting emotional and physical harm to the children they abuse. If you see that as an inconsequential distinction, then there is something very wrong with your moral compass, not Dan's.
okay... #9/#10 just offered up her seemingly pre-pubescent body and email address to the guy trying to NOT want to have sex with kids... Is this REALLY the forum for that??
@24: It's different because fucking children is actually wrong, particularly in a society that gives adolescents and children so little autonomy over their sexuality. Fucking individuals of the same sex as you who consent, on the other hand, is okay.
@24 I can see the similarity -- the advice to subvert one's natural given urges -- but there is a difference. In the situation you posed, the other party is assumed to be a fully consenting adult, whereas in a situation like CWIA's, the other party is a child. I think there's a significant difference in trying to keep someone from engaging in sex with an on-board adult of their own gender and trying to keep a person from having sex with a child, i.e. a person who is not physically, mentally, or emotionally mature enough yet to give consent. It's all about consent.
@24 (Crinoline) -- The difference should be obvious, but since it's not I will spell it out for you: children are too young to consent to sexual activity and therefore can only be the victim in any sexual encounter. No such concern exists with homosexual conduct between grown men or women.
Dan, thank you for being brave enough to address CWIA's taboo issue. It takes balls, and not many sex columnists have them. I really, really hope one day everybody will just chill out and realize being attracted to children isn't a choice: it's a burden.

@24 (Crinoline) > The difference lies here: men can give consent and enjoy sexual intercourse with other men. Children can't: that's why having sex with children is morally wrong. Trying to change CWIA's sexual preferences (if it is possible, which I highly doubt) will only make him happier, and avoid, well, children being raped.

Crinoline (#24),

It's different because gay adults are fully autonomous; children are not. Encouraging gay people to seek therapy to "straighten" them up is wrong because two gay adults in a consensual relationship do not infringe upon anyone's autonomy. On the other hand, when an adult makes advances on a child, that child is not fully autonomous and capable to accepting or rejecting these advances.
9/10 could be a cop engaged in a sting operation to capture child molesters. Xie could have seen CWIA's letter and posted to entrap him.
@24: Okay, people have explained why acting on sexual urges is different if the agent is a gay adult who looks for love and consensual sex with another same-sex adult than it is if the agent (whether gay or straight) is attracted to children. No question: there's a huge difference insofar as consequences go, and while trying to "convert" a gay person to hetero-ness is wrong, based on hate and intolerance, and misguided because not really possible, we would all agree (even the gold star pedophiles like CWIA) that the goal of a "conversion" of a pedophile into someone who has sexual interest only in adults is a worthy one.

So, as #25 puts it, the consequences are what's different.

But I think the question was meant to get at the impossibility of "re-wiring" someone's sexual orientation. If it doesn't work in "ex-gay" therapy, how can it work in "ex-pedo" therapy?
It seems un-doable. I think trying to redirect sexual attraction is a great hope, but probably an unrealizable one.

And the alternatives--find an adult partner with a youthful body type and facial appearance who knows about your interest and is willing or even likes to age play; white-knuckle it and hope to god you will never succumb to those urges; chemically castrate yourself--are all pretty extreme, offering varying degrees of success.

Poor CWIA is only in his late 20s. Should he really go through the rest of his life with no sexual desire? Is he going to be able to satisfy himself with an adult who presents as younger (and what happens as his partner ages? Does he have to keep finding new young-looking people to date? Can he marry? What will be the odds of a 20-something who looks like a pubescent wanting to date him when he's in his mid-50s?) Can he really be expected to grit his teeth and "just not do it" his whole life?

What do people do who have unrealizable fetishes, that is, fetishes/fantasies that can't be fulfilled because they're unreal (giant women, centaurs, mermaids, etc.)? How do they channel their desires into more realizable sex? Surely they must have "normal" sex with "normal" partners (oh, Sloggers are going to take me apart for that!), use the kind of porn they like (a BIG problem in CWIA's case, as it is illegal and unethical to make or have), and try to find partners who agree to a little role-playing.

Would some combo of this work for CWIA and others like him?
I have to applaud Dan's advice too to CWIA. I too am attracted to young boys but would never act on it. I just don't put myself in the position to be around them alone. I feel I could control myself, but would never want to test it.

Luckily, I am also very much attracted to adult men too and am able to satisfy any urges I may have in a legal and appropriate way.
@35 Thank you for that. I didn't know if I was misremembering the kind of poster Crinoline is but that question and the barrage of attacking responses all seemed wrong to me. Like that wasn't what Crinoline meant and we were all missing something.

And now, yeah, that is a really interesting question.

Ooooh, I think it's a bad, bad idea to try to approach pedophilia this way. The difference here is that the centaur fetishist can do everything possible to satisfy and, if that just whet's his appetite, OH WELL. If the little taste only makes her more hungry, that's just an oopsie and you're at a dead end.

Not so with pedophilia. It seems like you would want to avoid even masturbating to your own internal fantasies about it.

And this not just because it might make you want more. It also might acclimate you to the idea of fucking a child. CWIA finds that idea horrifying, a reaction he should protect.
OK appears not to recognize her own inconsistency:

"In other words, I was behaving as his sub."

"There is no way I am going to tell her that we are D/s, because my private life is none of her business."

Mr Savage correctly picked up on this.

What the letter fudges is whether the couple was just acting naturally and the daughter correctly interpreted "abusive" behaviour that happens to be consensual, whether the daughter is an alarmist who overreached but struck lucky, or where in between the truth falls. Were OK and the BF trying to tone themselves down in her presence? Mr Savage's suggestion offers the premise that they were.

OK seems to want a magic verbal formula that will, without telling the truth, convince her daughter she isn't being abused despite evidence to the contrary. I'm inclined to hope that no such formula exists. If it did, and truly abused women got hold of it, even if it only worked half so well for them...

On the question of presentation, What We Do versus Who We Are, if it's presented as Who We Are, it seems likely that OK will be visiting her grandchildren alone for quite some time, as that would basically be announcing that they'd likely model apparently abusive behaviour. What We Do, which need not go into full detail, at least leaves room for the daughter to counter with ground rules for Acceptable Conduct, and then they can hammer things out from there.
@38: All good points, in deeper and more thoughtful depth than Dan went into.
what #28 said.
I'd like to point out that not all child abusers are pedophiles. Per the Mayo Clinic, 45% prefer physically mature sexual partners, but are targeting children because children are weak, and they are predatory assholes. This brings me to my second essential point. Pedophiles who abuse children are ALSO predatory assholes. Just having a heinous sexual desire does not mean you are impelled to act on it- it's still a choice. And that's why, if I put myself in CWIA's position, I would consider castration "a small price," not to protect children, but to ease the burden on myself. Because I fully expect people like CWIA to spend the rest of their lives doing whatever they needed to do to avoid abusing children. (That's not a question, CWIA. You are definitely not going to hurt any children because you have clearly made the choice not to be a predatory asshole.) But if CWIA wants some chemical help to make that struggle less acute, that's his choice. Perhaps anti-depressants (with libido-lowering side effects) could be easier to obtain then chemical castration (or actual castration, which sounds like a big logistical problem).

Also, someone mentioned that castration does not have an effect on recidivism in child abuse offenders. I submit that's because while ATTRACTION to children is linked to libido, the tendency to actually hurt them is linked to predatory assholedom, and predatory assholedom is not located in balls or dick. It's like rape of adults- rape is not unrelated to sexuality and attraction, but sexuality and attraction does not cause rape. It's the will to dominate and hurt laid over sexuality and attraction. Take away sexuality and attraction from a committed rapist, and that person will still have the will to dominate and hurt- hence the recognized issue of the impotent rapist.
@22's concerns about mandatory reporting were what I was thinking, too- I'm currently studying to be a counselor and here in IL, it is being stressed that identifiable, immediate harm is when reporting is mandatory.

Still, is there any way for a network to be set up for GSPs of licensed therapists who are willing to work with clients like CWIA?

Dan- I see that you're going to be the keynote at ASCA in June (and I so, so, so wish I had the $ to go!)- what about talking to them about this? They could create professional development materials on acknowledging the existence of GSPs and the importance of giving them the support they need to continue to be GSPs. Fucking hell, if any group of counselors should be immediately and inherently invested in helping make this happen, it should be those of us in schools.
@26, It never would have happened if he remembered that he'd agreed to not do that, and then not done it. He has ultimate control over his penis and where it goes.

She didn't ask for advice, per se; she asked if her feelings were valid. Well, Dan sure did validate 'em.
I am entirely with Dan on his "gold star pedophile" theory.

As a gay man who is not a pedophile, I have often wondered what it would be like to live with that particular branch of "sexual orientation" and shuddered to think how lucky I am that I am not so inflicted. I know fropm experience how many people view my sexual orientation (gay) as sick and immoral, and I can just imagine what it must be like to be a pedophile.

I have always believed that pedophiles who do not act on their attractions, and maybe even some that do, deserve more sympathy that scorn. I one had a friend who actually admitted to many of his friends that he was attracted to young guys. He "solved" his problem by simply dating a guy in his late 20's who looked like a teenager. His boyfriend wasn't very good looking; in fact, he was skinny and short and baby-faced, and had bad skin like a teen. It sure worked for him.

I have no idea if they're still together, but I remember thinking he was lucky to find someone who could legally fufill his fantasies.

I just think many gay men who discuss pedophilia and say, "That's sick, creepy and disgusting" are rather hypocritical, when there are coutless straight people who think the same thing about them.
@35 I agree that the US ban even on fake child porn creates a problem. The giant-women fetishists I know rely heavily on porn, as do rape fetishists. I personally think that people who are into children should be allowed to look at fake child porn (drawings, CGI, etc). But I believe that in the US this is just as illegal as porn made with real children.

@37, I disagree. Rape fetishists read rape porn, they role play, but they don't generally graduate to real rape. There's no reason to think that child-fetishists would graduate from cartoon-porn to abuse (here I'm agreeing with @42).

@38 agreed, good points. But since the daughter is willing to have (apparently abused) Grandma around her children, she doesn't seem to have a complete ban on people in problematic relationships. She just has a ban on actual abusers. So she may be willing to allow them to come over together, once she realizes it's consensual and joyful (and assuming they agree to tone it down around her and her children -- no collars, no kneeling, etc.)

I also think OK should praise her daughter for having the guts to speak up about what she was seeing.

And I recommend offering her some literature, such as:
- John Warren's The Loving Dominant
- Miller and Devon's Screw the Roses, Send Me the Thorns
- William Brame's Different Loving: The World of Sexual Dominance
Tech-savvy-at-risk-youth, please delete @47 for making unhelpful suggestions to people vulnerable to such suggestions.
I so don't get D/s.
@49 if you have questions, ask away.
I do not think the mandatory reporting laws are too strict... after all, if CWIA worked with children or had children, that *should* be reported. It's not like he will get reported for just having those desires, after all... Unfortunately I think that the bulk of CWIA's question went unanswered: how to find free/cheap treatment in the US.

Chemical castration actually does drastically reduce recidivism rates for pedophiles. And for those who think it's too high a price, if CWIA is only/mostly attracted to children, there is never going to be an outlet for his sexual desires, anyway. And what you don't want, you can't really miss.
Jill: I didn't until you mentioned it. ewwww.

Poor CWIA - as Dan points out, being burdened with sexual desire that could actually be realized but is both extremely unethical and illegal to realize must be terrible. Kudos to you, CWIA, for having enough empathy/social conscience to not shatter the lives of others for your own pleasure. Maybe just knowing that everyone on the planet doesn't hate you on the basis of thought crime (we think that your actions are what's important) will be of some help. I wish you the best in finding effective treatment.

@9/10: While you intentions may be the best possible, you might well be baiting predators by posting your e-mail address publicly like that (while in an ideal world it should be perfectly safe for anyone to publicly post contact information, we don't live in an ideal world, and it makes sense to take reasonable precautions). That could be dangerous to both you and others. Assuming a proper forum even does exist (navigating ethics around teenage sexual agency is seriously problematic in contemporary USA culture and law), this really isn't it.
I still don't understand why it's cool to consent to abuse so long as it's for sex play but if my spouse and I decide it's appropriate for him to beat my ass for not doing the dishes or cleaning his home properly that's a ticket to law intervention.

Abuse is abuse, even if it's to get sexual pleasure, and it's exactly that kind of scenario Granny's talking about that got me to wonder wtf I was thinking letting people beat the hell out of me for sexual pleasure and what on earth that was coming from. I'm glad I decided it was inappropriate and took steps to change what I feel strongly was a problem rooted in psychology.

And I love how sub people will always say "oh my prediliction for getting my ass kicked to get me horny has nothing to do with my abusive childhood, which yes, I had, but... it's TOTALLY separate."

No it's not. It's really not. Get some good psychological counselling and find out why you think letting someone treat you like shit is hot. You'd be told to do that in ANY other scenario don't let the fact it brings you sexual pleasure make it okay. Lots of people have orgasms from incestual sex with parents and grandparents and that doesn't make it any more "right."

I realize my view is not popular, but it bears looking into. I have never been happier than when I learned enthusiastic passionate sex didn't have to have anything to do with humiliating me or hurting me and that I was a human worth having orgasms and that there was nothing wrong with me for enjoying sex. I wish everyone could feel it. And yes I thought I felt that way too when I found BDSM but truth is if I'm really honest during every session I never felt "joy" during, I felt like I was "getting what I deserved" and the joy came after when it ended. You know, like the honeymoon cycle in any abusive relationship.
Um, if I can walk around the world all my life and not rape every person I find irresistibly attractive, then why the fuck are all the pedos saying it's so hard?

Are we seriously applauding these people for NOT RAPING when most of humanity (oh god I hope) manages not to do so?
@54, for me, BDSM is like a mashup of massage, strenuous exercise and meditation: it feels good and clears my mind. Do you tell people who run marathons that they're clearly delusional for enjoying that pain and should seek therapy?

@21 I do also think that a submissive Christian can honorably choose to submit to her husband for non sexual reasons, if that's what they both want, and if children are not being physically or emotionally abused in the process.

So what's abuse? Abuse is when one person doesn't want the violence or yelling or degradation and is only sticking around for the nice-guy routine that follows. Or if the person wants bad treatment out of self-hatred, as in wendykh's experience, but that's dangerous to diagnose from the outside.

I should say that BDSM (like many things) can be addictive, and then it should be judged by whether it interferes with the person's ability to live a happy, productive life.
@55- read @14, ankylosaur. He said it perfectly, as so often happens!
@54, stop projecting your own psychological issues onto other people. There are people into BDSM who have never been abused - Dan has pointed that out in the past. And even if they have been, you have no way of knowing if their penchant for BDSM is linked to it or not. You are not them. You do not and can not know what is going on in their heads, and you do not and can not know what is best for other people.
"There is no way I am going to tell her that we are D/s, because my private life is none of her business."

The problem is that her private life isn't exactly private. If other people are aware of the behavior (even if not to the full extent), then its not private. It would almost be like having sex in a public space, but asking people not to watch because what they're doing is private.

If any level of D/s play leaks out to the public, I believe its necessary to provide the context for the behavior. Like Dan said, you don't need to give a detailed explanation, just a general statement that its consensual role play.

Also, I wonder if the extension of the D/s dynamic beyond the bedroom to the public space was intentional or just failure to properly monitor behavior. If part of the enjoyment of the play was that the D/s behavior was in public and viewed by other people, then the daughter was being INCLUDED in their private life and deserves an explanation even moreso.
Ms Erica - Certainly possible about how the daughter might handle the truth. You have far more expertise than I. The daughter not thinking the BF is a good person just suggested to me that that was at least as much disliking how he acts in general as how he treats her.

I didn't specify, but definitely props to the daughter for speaking up.

You draw a much more generous line than I would. I was thinking more along the lines of: No giving orders; no disrespectful language, instead of collars and kneeling. Of course, we don't know how old the children are. I don't know why, as this is not anything that will ever be of any personal relevance, but I'd be interested in your views on what is generally appropriate or at least acceptable, if anything, in the company of children of various ages.
@54: I didn't have an abusive childhood. I'm also into BDSM, because it's exciting for me. When I'm aroused, the sting of a slap to my boobs makes me more aroused. It's not at all about "punishing" me, because I am perfectly happy to have vanilla sex most of the time. But my boyfriend also seems hotter to me if he tells me what to do in the bedroom. I always have the option of saying "no."

I'll admit, I am not at all into the 24/7 D/s lifestyle. When my boyfriend tells me I've been a naughty girl, it's definitely not because I've forgotten to do a chore, it's because I very clearly want him to spank me.

I used to put clothespins on my clit before masturbating because when I took the clothespins off, my clit would be much more sensitive and so it wouldn't take nearly as long to get me off. It was a little painful, but I don't feel pain the same way when I'm turned on. I think most people who are into masochism are similar, that the rush they get from some application of pain doesn't feel the same when they're aroused as it does when they're not.
With regards to Dan's response to CWIA, I noticed he kept referring to men and women who were struggling with attraction to children. I'm not an expert, but my understanding is that this only occurs in men (at least attraction to children 12 & under, and even in the range of 16-18, it's vanishingly rare in women). Any comments?
I so don't get D/s.

I get D/S as sexual play, a game to indulge in every now and then. I absolutely don't get 24/7 "lifestyle" D/S and I don't think I ever will.
@ wendykh "I was a human worth having orgasms and that there was nothing wrong with me for enjoying sex."

Most of us start out with that as a premise. I don't think it isn't so much that your view isn't popular as that your problem isn't common. I suspect you aren't unique in doing kink because you were broken and not because you were kinky, but I do think you are very unusual. I'm glad you fixed that. Perhaps you could encourage the few people who are also in your position to fix that without being inflammatory and offensive.

It is very easy for a 24/7 D/s situation to turn abusive. That does not mean that BDSM is inherently abusive.

@60 the goal is not to let others know what is going on, but to have fun with subtle meanings. So if he asks me to get him a drink, or wear a particular outfit, he says please, but he'll give me a look that means it's an order, making it fun for me to obey. So there are orders and orders. To me, "no collars, no kneeling, etc" meant "nothing that would seem creepy to non-participants." People shouldn't be barking orders in front of random strangers, let alone children.
@63 I think people who don't know someone in a 24/7 relationship have odd ideas about what it must look like. They perhaps imagine that the sub is always naked, or gagged and chained to a wall. Mostly, our lives look like anyone else's, unless we're having sex or at a BDSM party. But it enlivens our everyday interactions. For one thing, it allows us to end any disagreements quickly and with a jolt of sexy pleasure rather than a lingering sense of annoyance. (Oh, right, I'm giving in because I've chosen to always give in, rather than because his way of loading the dishwasher is superior to mine :-)
Everyone (excepting trolls) has offered good views on pedophilia and what the LW should/should not do. I have nothing substantive to add - just that pedophilia is a curse. The word, and concept of, a "curse" seems to be considered sort of antique or even quaint these days, but that's what pedophilia seems like to me: an old-school, Ancient-Greece-level, capital-C Curse, one that drags you down and the people around you.

But LW - you can't be fatalistic: with therapy, self-discipline and sublimation, you can beat this and NEVER hurt a child. We're all rooting for you.
I'll add myself to the list of those no thrilled with Dan's answer to the perhaps-misnamed OK.

Dan quite rightly called the woman out for, in participating in soft D/S roleplay in public, showing lack of awareness and respect for other people's sexual boundaries.

Well, the lack of good sexual boundaries is a characteristic of both abusers and abuse victims. The woman is able to rationalize her own violation of her daughter's boundaries by roleplaying in public - a violation her boyfriend also participates in.

If she's unclear on her daughter's boundaries, it's quite likely that she's also unclear on her own. The same goes for the boyfriend who is willing to play the sexual dominator in front of his sub's children.

These two do not come across as a couple with a clear idea of what is and is not appropriate, respectful, or safe, and such people are just as likely to cause harm to themselves and each other as they are to the people around them.

The children of abusers and abuse victims very often have to grow up with far more finely attuned danger-senses than their parents. I think it's very possible that the mother would be wise to listen to her daughter.
To CWA - there are some great 12 step programs out there for compulsive sexual behavior. You'll get the opportunity to talk about your feelings with people who will thank you for sharing, give you a hug, and ask you to keep coming back. Acceptance like that from a group of people goes a long way towards restoring sanity. If you're not into Jesus, there are some fairly secular groups out there that don't require any set of beliefs for membership. Sex Addicts Anonymous comes to mind.

There are a lot of people out there struggling as you are, many unsuccessfully. I agree with Dan - you are an amazingly strong person to have gone this long without acting on your unwanted desires.
@62, no, there have been cases in which small children have been sexually abused by adult women. You're right that is is rare, but it does happen.

It is possible that sexual abuse by women is under-reported; if so, it's possible that this is at least partially due to people not recognizing that women can be molesters.
35-nocutename-- Thank you. When I asked the difference in 24, it was only because I noticed the similarity. I didn't have an agenda. I thought it was obvious that the outcomes of having a sexual relationship with a willing adult man and a too-young-to-consent child were obvious. That's why I phrased my question in terms of how the ADVICE was different.

Thinking about it more, I've realized the source of my discomfort. Every time the Religious Right says homosexuality is a choice and recommends either a talking cure or, worse, pray away the gay, the answer is not "this is harmless and none of your business." The answer is "god made me this way," "it's not a choice," and "suck my dick." The answer is "therapy doesn't work," not "therapy is irrelevant."

So it would seem that recommending therapy and figuring out a way to get therapy without becoming a pariah or landing in jail was giving the Right ammunition. It was giving credence to the ideas of the enemy while offering false hope to someone in pain.

How is a prohibition against sticking a knife into someone's kidney any different from a prohibition against sticking a penis into someone's vagina?

Both are laws against sticking an object into a body part. We're hypocrites if we say any different!
In light of the well-argued point @68, and the fact that the LW says that her daughter suspects abuse based only on "my generally deferring to his wishes," I'm curious whether others think it's inappropriate to let it be seen that I enjoy deferring to my husband's wishes, by smiling when he asks me to reload the dishwasher? Is that kind of thing involving others in our sex life?

And if so, how is that different from PDA in general? Is it just as inappropriate when he hugs and kisses me on the lips? Is our holding hands inappropriate? Him patting my butt as he walks by? Me rubbing his shoulders? What level of "involving others in our sex life" crosses the line?
@66 Erica -- No, that's not it, I don't think that 24/7 D/S means living in an SM dungeon. I get that it is about "obeying" and acknowledging the other person as your "leader" -- at least, I think that that is what it's about. I even can imagine something like "submitting to a powerful leader who knows best" and not having to think for yourself, not having responsibility, returning to childhood as it were, being somehow liberating.

But I don't get how this can ever be anything more than a fantasy. I reality, your "dom" is not a powerful leader who knows best. You are both adults. So how can you lead your life as if you are a child instead of an adult?

If I completely misunderstood the nature of a 24/7 D/S relationship, which I probably did, please let me know.
Maybe it's just a figure of speech when CWIA says he "wishes to Christ" that things could be different for him, but if he's interested, we've started an online Christian forum to support Same-sex Youth Attracted Persons ('gay' pedophiles, hebephiles and ephebophiles) who are dedicated to resisting self-interested temptation and making ethical and legal use of our God-given natures. See
Maybe it's just a figure of speech when CWIA says he "wishes to Christ" that things could be different for him, but if he's interested, we've started an online Christian forum to support Same-sex Youth Attracted Persons ('gay' pedophiles, hebephiles and ephebophiles) who are dedicated to resisting self-interested temptation and making ethical and legal use of our God-given natures. See
Maybe it's just a figure of speech when CWIA says he "wishes to Christ" that things could be different for him, but if he's interested, we've started an online Christian forum to support Same-sex Youth Attracted Persons ('gay' pedophiles, hebephiles and ephebophiles) who are dedicated to resisting self-interested temptation and making ethical and legal use of our God-given natures. See
Jill, #1. I didn't until you mentioned it, and, well ewwwww

Hey, CWIA: hang in there. Get help. I was molested by a f--king USAF fighter pilot when I was 10, not good. I won't say my life was permanently messed up, only happened once, but how many kids did he screw up I don't know.

Dan, start a collection for this guy, I'll cover the first session.


Um, I'm sorry, are you referring to the advice from the commenters? Because I didn't see that in Dan's response...
"I'm curious whether others think it's inappropriate to let it be seen that I enjoy deferring to my husband's wishes"

Yes, I think power exchange should be kept away from children. Just fake being utterly egalitarian in front of them.

I liked what you said about how you interact.

"To me, "no collars, no kneeling, etc" meant "nothing that would seem creepy to non-participants." People shouldn't be barking orders in front of random strangers, let alone children."

Sounds like you are considerate of your guests and other people around you.
@46 From my understanding of rape fetishists, they aren't like, "I want to rape somebody really bad so I'll play rape to try to satisfy my urge to rape in a way that nobody actually gets raped." That's why they don't graduate to rape. It's because they never wanted actual rape in the first place.
@74, to me, it's not like being a child, it's like being a nun in the Church of Existentialism. It doesn't really matter how the dishwasher gets loaded. There's the way I want to do it, and the way he wants me to do it. We could argue, or I can just submit. Submission is a challenge (I'm very strong-willed), but it makes loading the dishwasher a game, instead of a chore.

When it comes to important issues (raising our children, political campaigns, finding ways to save money or avoid wasting energy), we discuss matters as if we were equals. If we end up disagreeing, and doing things his way is an acceptable choice, then I'll do things his way. If it's not an acceptable choice (if he wanted me to campaign for Rick Santorum), then I would defy him.

24/7 doesn't mean total obedience. A nun might have moments of rebellion too. But the goal is obedience. (If he really supported Santorum, he'd have lost his mind, and in that case I'm under orders to leave him and/or get him some help.)

Crinoline has always been cool before, it must be a method thing not a comparison of gay to pedo. Something about how it is inborn and impossible to fix with therapy not how it is harmless. So I second your post.
@ 66 that bit about the dishwasher provides some insight that was missing, thanks EricaP. Also thanks @61, I don't get the pain thing either but I can appreciate that it works for some. You do make it sound exciting.

But back to D/s: I can't stand being told what to do, and I've also made efforts as an adult not to be an assertive prick myself, cultivating instead negociation and empathy skills, because do unto others etc. So the desire for domination (or to dominate) is about as perplexing to me as getting turned on by being henpecked and nagged. Except in D/s the potential for abuse is so much greater, and in some cases to us lay people is basically indistinguishable. I mean, here's a woman whose own daughter is concerned for her welfare. That's not sexy. Yes, consent makes it all okay: but we don't grant consent to children, even fifteen-year-olds who seem to know what they want; we question whether women in Islamic countries who defend their culture and insist they are happy are really so; at what point is a D/s relationship crossing the line, even with consent? And again, how is that sexy?

You are a wonderful person for doing this. Hang in there. I don't know what will help. Go ahead and look into therapy and chemical castration(you can always stop taking the drugs they don't do permanent damage), support groups, young looking boyfriends and anything else that might help.

The only thing I do know that helps is stay away from kids. Don't have kids, don't have friends with kids, don't work with them, don't date people with kids etc. Seriously, arrange your life around avoiding contact with kids. Sadly you should even stay away from your own relatives if they are a problem.

I am sorry someone even suggested suicide. I was inpatient with someone who had tried to kill himself because he was in your shoes while I was there because I had been raped as a kid. I spent most of my time on the ward trying to convince him that he was a good person and to not hurt himself again.

Don't hurt yourself. You are a good person. Remember you have not hurt anyone.
I totally agree about the Heartbroken response, it was really wonderful advice and insight, yet again mr savage! Thank you for what you do. :)
I want to add my vote of appreciation for the coverage of pedophilia. Dan, I'd like you to ask your pedophilia experts this: in an ideal world -- without politics & funding issues etc, and based on what we currently know -- how would a society deal with pedophilia? What would the experts put in place if they had free rein? Please tell us, I'm fascinated.
Thank you all, really. This is a good start.

The interesting thing about pedophilia is that probably there are safe ways of indulging in it -- from pornography to sex with children under controlled situations. (If sex is just a regular activity, and if the obsessive side is taken away from it, it shouldn't in principle be harder than playing sports or games with children, which adults can do. The idea that sex inherently harms children, rather than manipulation or predatorial assholery or lack of attention to children's needs and perspective, is probably going to be the last bit of sex-negativity people will let go of -- if ever they do.)

Given the current cultural scene, however, the chances of this ever being actually rationally discussed in public are the proverbial snowball's chance in hell. Not even here in the Netherlands, or in Scandinavia, would this be a good idea.

@nocutename, @crinoline, on the idea of the treatability of sexual impulses... Lord Domly Pants's Bane above mentinoed something I find important, namely, that not everybody does the same thing for the same reason. He distinguished 'broken people who turn to kink' (like wendykh) from 'really kinky people'. He went on saying that the former might benefit from therapy, in that finding out what the real problem/dilemma was for which kink was only a substitute might make the subject happier than the kink itself and so "free" him/her from the kink.

I suspect the same is true for pedophiles. (And even for gays, for that matter. I suspect there must be some actually straight people who think they are gay for reasons other than 'true' sexual orientation; for these people, some sort of re-orientation therapy might actually work and 'cure' them from the gayness they thought they had.)

In other words, depending on the actual reasons you have for wanting the sex you want -- homosexuality, paraphilia (kinks), pedophilia -- therapy might work. Or it might not, in case you are a 'true' one. But you'll only know if you try.

This indeed means, by the way, that it is not really correct for gay activists (as Crinoline quite correctly points out) to base their defense on 'therapy doesn't work' rather than on 'therapy is irrelevant'. For some people therapy will probably work (if they're really straight and think they're gay for some other reason) and will be relevant; it's just that these are not the 'true' gays. The error of the conservatives is thinking all gays are 'false' gays; the error of gay activists would be thinking all gays are 'true' gays.

(Which of course suggest the topic of where 'true' gayness -- or 'true' kinkiness, 'true' pedophilia -- comes from, if not from childhood traumas. My quick speculative answer: from childhood experiences, meaning by this that not all things that determine who we will be in life need be 'traumatic' or 'conflictual' [existentialist 'bad faith'], they can also be 'organic' and 'shaping'.)

@EricaP/RegisteredEuropean, discussing the the D/s lifestyle... EricaP offers a good description to RegisteredEuropean. I agree that the religious imagery is quite apt. In fact, I will go further and ask: isn't it acceptable that religious people find happiness in the idea of submitting to god (this is the meaning of Islam)? And does this submission imply a loss of freedom and agency--or rather, as most religious people claim, a gain ('the truth will set you free')?

European, I think that wanting to be a child again is really the wrong comparison. 'Surrendering to the light' might make more sense.

To me, personally, the idea of a Domme partner is like the idea of an inspirational angel. She is surrounded by a halo of light, and every submission to her is really a step up on the great chain of being, with a near-transcendent side to it that even goes beyond sex and is difficult to describe clearly. It feels numinous, awe-inspiring. When you do it, when you truly submit, you are Walking With God In The Valley of The Shadow of Death (and fearing no evil, because your Domme is with you; and you know she's a good person, and would never harm you -- because you're not stupid and you vetted her before this whole thing started. :-)

And it's sexy like all hell. Suddenly every little thing has an immediate effect on your sex organs. It's like doing foreplay 24/7, as it were.
@1 Please, PLEASE stop spamming these comment threads and trying to drive traffic to your shitty blog.
Okay, EricaP (@73), I'll take a stab at it, but I'm afraid I'll be seen as criticizing you again. So here is a general disclaimer: I believe that you know what you like and what's best for you, and I believe that you know when you're happy and you are happy. I also believe that the choice you've made to be a sub is your own choice.

I kind of meant this to be a prophylactic disclaimer so I wouldn't bring on people's anger again, but I realized as I was writing it, that it starts off my response to your question @73. I'll introduce the conundrum like this:
I'm Jew and I'm also an atheist. (Happy Purim, by the way! In a minute I need to take my hamantaschen out of the oven.)

For many people that statement is contradictory: Judaism is a religion, so how can you be an atheist and still a Jew. But Judaism is both a religion and a culture. Obviously, for a lot of people, it's both simultaneously. For some Jews the two aspects are inextricably intertwined.

A lot of non-Jews have never really thought about it: since their own religion is separate from a particular named culture (though clearly, the presence of their religion in their lives provides a specific culture and a community--it's just not necessarily recognized by the rest of the world as a culture tied irrevocably to their particular religion)it makes no sense that some who says she is Jewish could also say she doesn't believe in God. Or maybe it makes less sense when, despite her profession of atheism, she's celebrating a holiday that is religious in origin and nature. (Or maybe not--one could see Christmas being celebrated by people who aren't really acknowledging or observing any of the truly religious aspects of it.)

For me, the two aspects of Judaism can be separated; I am an atheist Jew, but I'm well aware that there is an inherent problem with characterizing myself that way. In some very deep level, the two aspects--culture/ethnicity and religion--can't really be teased fullly apart.

So it would seem in a D/s relationship that extends outside the bedroom, or the purely sexual realm, into "real life"--whether those extensions take the place of what would be recognizably D/s- ish to the general population or whether there is a private little smile hovering on the lips of the person being ordered to re-load the diswasher.

Because by it's nature, a true D/s relationship MUST extend beyond merely the bedroom, even if the sub isn't kneeling, wearing a collar, and calling his Dom "Master," but is even saying, "And when you pick up the groceries, make sure to get 2% milk--last time you got whole."

So here's the conundrum as I see it. If you're ethical, you don't involve unaware and non-consensual people in your sex life. If you realize that being asked to do something domestic is an order-in-disguise or a private hint at the sexual relationship, and it's being done in the presence of others who don't intend to be part of your sex life, than it's wrong, no matter how benign-seeming or really benign (let's say the intention is not to involve innocents against their will or without their knowledge; it's just a sexy dynamic you've got going and it turns each other on) it is.

But if you say, as I can about being an atheist Jew, "I am capable of separating the bedroom or more explicitly sexual aspect of the D/s dynamic from non-sexual, YET STILL D/S-Y ASPECTS OF OUR RELATIONSHIP," you should be aware that there is something inextricable about that dynamic, an intertwining of the D/s-sexual arena and the D/s-non-sexual arena, just as I have to acknowledge that Judaism is still a RELIGION and that, culturally-Jewish-only as I am, I am, by nature, and at my core, identifying as a member of a religion.

You can't fully separate your D/s-ness from your non-bedroom selves, roles, or relationship.

I'm not suggesting that you stop or try to stop, or that you are unethical for involving others as witnesses to what is also your sexual relationship (obviously amped way, way up); I'm saying that in the example you offered, this is a tricky ethical question, worthy of a lot of consideration.

Well! I just finished writing my comment and posting it and now I see there have been a bunch responding to EricaP @ 73. If my thoughts echo what has already been posted I apologize for seeming to beat a dead or answered horse.
we recently found out that our now-18-yo son had been involved with an openly gay man in is 30's for 2 years - age 15-17. It was "consentual" in that my son considered this POS his boyfriend.

My son has been out for a couple of years- but he wasn't out yet when this "family friend" (and teacher) manipulated him into this "relationship". At the time, POS was the only person he had come out to- his role model and confidante.

I guess POS saw an opportunity & took it. Fortunately, POS is no longer in the state, and our son seems well-adjusted and happy. He now has a nice "normal" boyfriend and going to college in the fall.

Sadly, as Dan tried to explain to me when I turned to him for advice abt this, until there are more openly gay/accepted kids in school, these teenagers will be lonely and vulnerable to POS's like this one.

Is this POS a pedofile? He is to us, but truly he is just a lying, pathetic, lonely single gay man, who befriended a high school kid & fooled our family into trustiing him.

We will never forgive him. I wish I could, but I feel like he stole my son's hs years.
@62 - While it isn't commonly reported, at least, there are definitely cases of adult woman molesting very young children (not just teenagers). One of my best friends was repeatedly sexually molested by his own mother. He was about six when it started.
@ #89... you said the following: "The interesting thing about pedophilia is that probably there are safe ways of indulging in it -- from pornography to sex with children under controlled situations. (If sex is just a regular activity, and if the obsessive side is taken away from it, it shouldn't in principle be harder than playing sports or games with children, which adults can do. The idea that sex inherently harms children, rather than manipulation or predatorial assholery or lack of attention to children's needs and perspective, is probably going to be the last bit of sex-negativity people will let go of -- if ever they do.)"

That's rather still a disgusting attitude. Comparing sex with children to playing games if it's not manipulated? Children don't have the emotional maturity to know better. Explaining sex to a kid, telling htem i'ts healthy and feels good and selling it like a vitamin supplement is still manipulation... An adult has the responsibility to protect children from doing things before they're ready. Why not tell a 6 year old that didn't take a nap to do a line of cocaine to wake up? When not abused and in small doses, it's harmless right? Such a defense of logic could only come from a pedophile man. It's just searching for justification for being sick in the head and nothing more.

I have read about people who had sex with a parent and still do, because they were raised with the logic you suggest. It's still brain washing. It's subscribing to a belief because you trusted someone who abused your trust. Why are people catholic? Because they were raised catholic, and did not chose it. Raising a kid that sex with daddy is a just bonus to jock straps after a game of baseball is revolting. Please don't encourage people with diseased minds with your nasty ideas.

@54 (wendykh) I am a femsub, and I did not have anything remotely resembling an abusive childhood. My parents are still married, I was never beaten or sexually assaulted or neglected. And I'm also a masochist, and that entails everything from spanking, flogging, and hair-pulling to tattoos, piercings, and scarification. Most people who have tattoos or piercings will tell you that they're addictive. Many people compulsively eat hot/spicy food, even if it doesn't do anything to enhance the flavour, because of the sensation of heat. All of these things (like getting spanked, or pushing your body beyond the extreme by running a marathon, or having a needle shoved through your nipples) cause a chemical reaction in the brain: when your brain senses pain, it releases endorphins. The high I got when I got my nipples pierced for the second time, or when I got my first tattoo is very similar to being drunk, or coming down from a really intense orgasm. THAT is what makes pain feel good. So some masochists aren't working through their issues--they just like the rush they get from feeling pain when it coincides with something they enjoy doing.
@ #89... you said the following: "The interesting thing about pedophilia is that probably there are safe ways of indulging in it -- from pornography to sex with children under controlled situations. (If sex is just a regular activity, and if the obsessive side is taken away from it, it shouldn't in principle be harder than playing sports or games with children, which adults can do. The idea that sex inherently harms children, rather than manipulation or predatorial assholery or lack of attention to children's needs and perspective, is probably going to be the last bit of sex-negativity people will let go of -- if ever they do.)"

That's rather still a disgusting attitude. Comparing sex with children to playing games if it's not manipulated? Children don't have the emotional maturity to know better. Explaining sex to a kid, telling htem i'ts healthy and feels good and selling it like a vitamin supplement is still manipulation... An adult has the responsibility to protect children from doing things before they're ready. Why not tell a 6 year old that didn't take a nap to do a line of cocaine to wake up? When not abused and in small doses, it's harmless right? Such a defense of logic could only come from a pedophile man. It's just searching for justification for being sick in the head and nothing more.

I have read about people who had sex with a parent and still do, because they were raised with the logic you suggest. It's still brain washing. It's subscribing to a belief because you trusted someone who abused your trust. Why are people catholic? Because they were raised catholic, and did not chose it. Raising a kid that sex with daddy is a just bonus to jock straps after a game of baseball is revolting. Please don't encourage people with diseased minds with your nasty ideas.

@ Dukefairfax o (#87)... I'm curious about that too.

I commend the guy for reaching out for help... but what we know with hard facts is that pedophiles almost always repeat their crime in some way.

It really is telling someone that's a straight man they can't legally be attracted to women, but that is harmless. We not talking about children.

Rehabilitation and therapy do not bare good results, and could almost be said that they don't work at all. So this is what I'm curious to hear about from an "expert" who isn't going to say, "Abandon all hope, all ye who enter."

So then what would we do? Execute them all? What they're doing is awful, but I don't believe these people can help how they feel. I don't think there's a pill that can make it go away. Put them in jail forever? A pedophile colony under monitoring?

Because me, as a human, if someone molested my niece... and they were walking in front of my car... only an act of god could stop me from pushing the gas pedal to the floor and shouting, "no brake you sick mother..." out my window. If I were on a jury for a murder trial where someone too revenge on a child molester, I couldn't vote guilty. Because that person 98% of the time is going to repeat the offense.
@91, "don't involve unaware people in your sex life... in the example you offered, this is a tricky ethical question."

I agree that it's tricky, but I'm still stuck on whether it's okay for vanillas to hug and kiss their sweeties, give shoulder rubs in front of their children, wink at each other suggestively.

I think my basic sense is that it is okay to portray a loving relationship to one's children, and that part of a loving relationship is being a bit physical together. Groping genitals or boobs in front of the children isn't okay, but kissing and hugging is. And I guess, really, I think that smiling at each other over a politely worded request is more like kissing than it is like groping. I'm open to other people's thoughts on this (and will try not to get defensive :-)
"sex with children under controlled situations"

I'm curious to how you think that could possibly be acheived. I do think that having sex with children probably is inherently wrong, even though the whole 'children aren't sexual' premise has always bewildered me. I've been 'sexual' for as far back as I can imagine. I seem to be slightly unique in that respect though since the statement appears at all....

If it makes you feel any better. I'm usually squicked out by all PDAs/allusions to sex lives between couples. Vanilla/non equally.
We frequently castrate non-human animals so that they don't produce unwanted, unmaintainable amounts of puppies and kittens. This isn't considered 'cruel' or unusual. It isn't death and isn't the most terrible thing in the world. Spending the money on an orchiectomy is probably more affordable than a lifetime of therapy in USA.
CWIA: Please be sure to read #4 and #85. There are people like you out there and they have experiences that can help you.

It makes me very sad that our system is set up so poorly to help people like CWIA. Very sad.
I just wanted to point out that when they talk about castrating sex offenders, it's not like anyone gets their balls cut off. It's chemical castration, it's temporary, and if the treatment isn't state-mandated, I imagine it's expensive. It's not a viable option for this guy. But it's also not the horror everyone is imagining it to be. Hell, technically *I* have been "castrated" -- I'm on Depo-provera and it's absolutely killed my sex drive. In fact, Depo is one of the exact drugs they use to "castrate" men. I'm going off of it, because yay sex! But come on, I wasn't actually castrated. It's silly that we use that word for chemical sex drive control.