[Base] [Index]

Ames, M., Houston, D.

Legal, social, and biological definitions of pedophilia.

Archives of Sexual Behavior, 19(4), 333-342 (1990)

This paper is one of several in the bibliography that struggle with the definition of pedophilia. The primary thesis is that legal definitions (for example, in laws against child molestation) of pedophilia are not the same as the biological facts of pedophilia.

Pedophiles, under the biological definition, are those who are attracted to pre-pubescent children. It is common to describe arousal patterns in terms of age. It would be more accurate, however, to do so in terms of body type and build instead.

The law, on the other hand, is usually cast in terms of age alone. In addition, the "age of consent" is usually quite a bit older than the typical onset of puberty, especially in recent years. This fact has created a new category of sexual orientation: "ephebophilia", the attraction to teenage boys. Further, sexual attraction toward female teenagers would be considered almost normal among heterosexuals, but acting on these will fall under the same laws as against child molestation.

Of course, there is even a dramatic difference between biological and social or legal definitions. The biological pedophile can have a sexual attraction toward toward children, but not act on them. The social and legal definitions only talk about behavior. This is the essential difference between pedophiles and child molesters. It is quite possible to be one but not the other, or neither, or both.

The paper contains some interesting historical background. For example, although some adult/child sex was tolerated by Ancient Roman society, sex with children of higher social status was not. Boys of high status wore a gold ball around their necks to signal that they were not to be used sexually. Many pedophiles believe that modern day intolerance of adult/child sex is a distortion, that the normal society is tolerant, as evidenced by Ancient Rome and Greece. It would seem that historical fact weakens this argument somewhat.

The paper is valuable in that it highlights certain distinctions that, if not made, would make clear thinking about pedophilia impossible.

Peace,

Somebody Somewhere


NMV (No More Victims) is an anonymous mailing list moderated by Somebody Somewhere (an53307@anon.penet.fi if you want to be anonymous, an15@vox.xs4all.nl or na53307@anon.penet.fi if you don't). Email the moderator for more information.
from
NMV #25