NetNews Usenet Archive 1993 #3/NN_1993_3.iso/spool/soc/motss/58378

Internet Message Format | 1993-01-25 | 7.0 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (LASAGA)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: Pedophilia as sexual orientation
Date: 25 Jan 1993 14:32:44 -0600
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
Lines: 129
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <6952271325011993/A02694/POSSE/1171CB492800*@mrgate.uwyo.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Mark Wasson) writes this:
>There is a discussion on our company's local net concerning pedophilia as
>one type of sexual orientation.  Although the thread did start with
>someone mentioning homosexuals and pedophilia in the same sentence, the
>two have now been separated in the discussion.

Well, I hope they weren't equating the two (although many in the religious
right tend to do so, as well as other misinformed people.)

First of all, based on the set of _all_ studies of pedophilia and
homosexuality (and not just the select few questionably performed
by Paul Cameron), we have the following facts (and I can provide refs):

1.  The number of cases of pedophilia performed by heterosexuals vs.
    homosexuals can only be _estimated_ since many cases go unreported
    and the orientation of the abuser can only be assumed.  The
    orientation of the abuser is rarely actually known.  It is presumed
    based on the gender of the victim and the gender of the abuser;
    for example, if a boy reports being abused by a man, then it is
    assumed that the man is homosexual, though that is not necessarily
    the case (see comments towards the end of this reply).

2.  If you look at the absolute number of estimated/reported cases,
    gay men and lesbians are responsible for far fewer cases than
    heterosexual men and women.

3.  If you take into account the percentage of heterosexuals and
    the percentage of homosexuals in the population, you can also estimate
    the _rate_ of abuse.  In other words, absolute number of cases
    may be misleading because there are fewer homosexuals in the population
    and so a smaller number could still represent a larger percentage of
    cases of pedophilia from that subset of the population.  (Is this
    making sense?)  Anyway, so if you use the estimate that gay people
    compose about 10% of the population (the most widely documented
    figure, even though there are a few rare studies that claim
    the number is lower and a few rare studies that claim the number
    is higher), we get the following _estimates_  (and these are
    based on data produced by Paul Cameron, himself, the biggest homo-
    phobe conducting research who uses phrases like, "homosexuals are
    recruiting in our classrooms" in his articles and has been
    thrown out of the American Psychological Association for his
    biased "research"--of course, I use only his numbers, and not
    his twisted interpretations):
    a.  Gay males are estimated to molest at a rate of 14% (of all
        homosexual men) and heterosexual men are estimated to molest
        at a rate of 11% (of all homosexual men), and those numbers
        are statistically similar (because this is based on a reasonably
        small sample of the population).
    b.  Heterosexual women are about 1/2 to 1/3 as likely as men to
        abuse children.
    c.  Lesbian/bisexual women are 5 times LESS likely to abuse as
        heterosexual WOMEN (and about 10 times less likely to abuse
        as men, in general).

These estimates are based on numbers reported in: Cameron, P.,
"Child molestation and homosexuality", _Psychological Reports_, vol. 58,
p. 327-337, 1986.  His _interpretation_ of the numbers is very
contorted (e.g., lesbians are completely ignored, and small numbers
of "advances" that were reported were overly interpreted without any
statistical analyses while large numbers of other offenses are
simply ignored when they don't support his hypothesis, etc.).  Also,
just for the record, this journal publishes anything that a person
_pays_ to be published, so it is not considered a scientific journal.

OK.  So those are the facts.  So, even if we use numbers from one of
the most homophobic of "researchers," we can conclude as follows:
In terms of rate, men--whether homosexual or heterosexual--are the
most common offenders.  Heterosexual women come next.  Lesbian/bisexual
women are the rarest offenders.

>The discussion has brought up the question of whether laws put in place to
>provide civil rights protection on the basis of sexual orientation would
>somehow include pedophilia as a sexual orientation.

Despite claims by the religious right that _all_ homosexuals desire
to molest children, most homosexuals do not.  Even if you just look at
the numbers presented above, you have some evidence.

And, of course, even if many gay people _did_ commit pedophilia, it
would not mean that those who do not should be discriminated against
(e.g., could not find employment in our schools);  we just need a better
way to determine whether anyone is a pedophile, gay or straight.
And, secondly, civil rights protection on the basis of any characteristic
cannot infringe upon our protection of children's rights.  Your coworkers'
concerns are simply based on fear, especially, fear about that which
they do not know.  (It's great that you are trying to shed light on
the issue.)

>I assume that current laws protecting minors from sexual imposition by
>adults regardless of gender preference would still apply.  However, if
>pedophilia is a sexual orientation, how far would the rights of the
>pedophile extend.

Yikes.  Please do not equate homosexuality and pedophilia (see above on
incidence).  There is also some research that shows that many supposed
"homosexual" abusers have never had any adult relationships with members
of their same (or opposite) sex.  The same with many "heterosexual" abusers.
There is a researcher at Berkeley who argues that pedophilia, like rape,
is a crime of power and violence, not sex (or sexual orientation).
(Again, I can provide refs.)

>Presumably they end where the rights of the child begin,
>but would a daycare center, for example, be able to query potential
>employees on this?

The rights of children cannot be curtailed by anyone else's civil rights.
My civil rights cannot infringe upon yours, etc.  About whether daycare
centers can ask employees about this, well, I am assuming you are
suggesting that they be asked about their sexual orientation.  Again,
being homosexual does not a pedophile make.  In fact, it rarely involves
pedophilia.  And simply based on statistics, lesbians are your best bets
for child care.  But, regardless, each person should be judged on their
own merits when it comes to employment (again, a black man should not be
turned down because you are afraid he will steal your profits
since "many black men are thieves"--PLEASE, no flames, I am referring
to a typical, though unfortunate, stereotype about black men which
clearly is based on fear).

>Any comments, suggestions, etc., so that I can hold up my end of the
>argument?

Hope some of those can be of help.

-maria