- Post starter
- #13
Rose White
VIP Member
@littleoc first I want to say thank you for your thoughtful and open response
Your post was a journey and I want to engage with it. Lots of sparks
️ (and I mean lots, so here we go)

I believed I was a pedophile because I had fantasies about being a boy child being emotionally manipulated and raped by adult men. I was sexually aroused by the idea of boys having sex with men. And of me being a boy being seduced by a man. So I had something like autoandropedophilia. I wasn’t concerned about it until I recovered the memories of what my dad did and faced it in recovery of my self with my therapist. As I realized that what he did was wrong and harmful to me I realized that I was having those shameful fantasies as a way to gain control of my sexual self. I also presented as androgynous leading up to my mental recovery.
I believe I was at risk to be a pedophile toward teenage boys. I only felt ashamed of it when I realized that people weren’t objects. That I myself wasn’t an object.
To bring it back to the topic, I agree that calling it genetic is a distraction. And whether or not a pedophile can become a non-pedophile doesn’t necessarily depend on it being genetic. If data shows that pedophiles cannot become non-pedophiles, broadly speaking, then focus ought to be on safety—which is where a sizable division in ideas seems to take place.
I agree and I realize that the tone in my post is difficult to convey. I studied evolutionary psychology and I disagree with it. I think that focusing on the genetics of the perpetrators takes away from focus on the safety of the potential victims. But whether or not a pedophile can become a non-pedophile seems to be a logical segue for a discussion on genetics (as if genes are a stone tablet, which we both know is not true.)The problem isn't pedophilia itself. The issue is safety. Yes, we can study all day and research others' research all year to find out whether it's genetic or a disorder or not. But that in itself is not the main issue.
That’s not how my brain thinks. I think in percentages. Even if 20% of pedophiles had a genetic component that would be significant I think? (But again it would not be helpful for safety purposes I don’t think?) A lot of behavioral disorders are partially genetic and partially environmental (the identical twin studies separated at birth reveal which disorders have a stronger genetic component.)What does it mean if we found out that every pedophile was genetically "wired" to be that way?
From an academic perspective it’s not a secretThat it was secretly a sexual orientation
I think they are oriented toward children and gender. I think Weemie pointed out that the orientation towards children is technically not a sexual orientation but a paraphilia, which is not how chatGPT reflected it.There is no consensus among researchers that pedophiles are necessarily "born that way" in the sense of having a predetermined sexual orientation towards children
Theoretically.People who know better simply wouldn't do it, theoretically
Yes. Heart-breaking!did not know I could say no, or that some of the things I was agreeing to would cause me longterm confusion or harm, with VERY little guidance from outsiders. The fact that society saw me, then seen as a girl (one of the only times I ever truly leaned into that gender), in a certain light made it much, much worse
This was so so so hard for me to accept in my own case. I really wanted to believe that he had good intentions but was just too stupid or too f*cked yo from his own pedophile dad. I wanted so badly to let him off the hook for his own responsibilities. When I realized that from a legal perspective his actions were a crime something shifted—that was the beginning of my journey. If I believed he had good intentions then I was numb to the affects and internalized all my anger.Does it matter if he had good or bad intentions? No. It did not affect how it affected me. If we put him in the legal system right now, the intentions would not have merit.
He believed that. He was delusional. It’s not a sexual orientation, but it seems that some academics believe that if it is seen that way then removing the shame will allow them space to examine themselves. It seems they already don’t have shame. But I do believe you that some pedophiles and non-offenders attracted to children are bewildered and concerned by their fantasies.Pedo truly believed he had a sexual orientation that prevented him from connecting romantically or sexually with adults.
I believed I was a pedophile because I had fantasies about being a boy child being emotionally manipulated and raped by adult men. I was sexually aroused by the idea of boys having sex with men. And of me being a boy being seduced by a man. So I had something like autoandropedophilia. I wasn’t concerned about it until I recovered the memories of what my dad did and faced it in recovery of my self with my therapist. As I realized that what he did was wrong and harmful to me I realized that I was having those shameful fantasies as a way to gain control of my sexual self. I also presented as androgynous leading up to my mental recovery.
I believe I was at risk to be a pedophile toward teenage boys. I only felt ashamed of it when I realized that people weren’t objects. That I myself wasn’t an object.
Yep yep!!genetic or not, the issue is in the chosen actions and whether or not they caused harm.
I hope they are helping people. If so, that’s great. I think that I was able to change because I was ashamed of my own thoughts. And that shame was healthy. And I had a supportive T.there are forums out there, protected, specifically for these adults who are in need of validation and support because they are disturbed by their attractions
A child is NEVER the equal of the adult but the pedophile uses this trick all the damn time. The pedo depends upon the child believing they are equals, which I think is why they use the term love so much.second of all, if you love someone and respect them as an equal, do you risk hurting them?
Because you are not only a decent person but an exceptionally kind one.I personally can't even stand the thought of leaving people upset in a simple conversation. I would never sleep with anyone who might not know what they're getting in to.
He used the concept of love to manipulate. He had sex with one because he’s a rapist. Children cannot consent, ever. They are not developed enough physically or politically. Not only was it unnecessary it was exploitative. You and I both know that feeling like you’re going to die is not the same as actually dying. And tragically, the effect of sexual assault on children is them feeling every day like they ought to or want to die—maybe not right away, but at some point when all the processing catches up, when they are developed enough physically and politically. SI isn’t guaranteed permanent but it is a monstrous thing to maneuver into remission.If that pedo loved children so much, why did he have sex with one? Was that necessary? Would he have died if he had refrained?
To bring it back to the topic, I agree that calling it genetic is a distraction. And whether or not a pedophile can become a non-pedophile doesn’t necessarily depend on it being genetic. If data shows that pedophiles cannot become non-pedophiles, broadly speaking, then focus ought to be on safety—which is where a sizable division in ideas seems to take place.