Click on image, and open in new tab and/or window,
and/or download, in order to see in full resolution
Image created and published on August 21st, 2023.
Based on research conducted in September 2021.
Showing posts with label child molesters. Show all posts
Showing posts with label child molesters. Show all posts
Monday, August 21, 2023
Wednesday, January 4, 2023
Infographic: These Are the People Who Pizzagate Deniers Want Us to Believe Are Not Pedophiles
Click on the image, and/or open it in a new tab or window,
or download and open, in order to see in full detail.
Image created on January 21st, 2022.
First posted to Facebook on January 21st, 2022.
Posted to this blog on January 4th, 2023.
Image created on January 21st, 2022.
First posted to Facebook on January 21st, 2022.
Posted to this blog on January 4th, 2023.
Monday, May 24, 2021
Social Network Map of Child Molesting Attorneys, Fraudulent Psychiatrists, and Corrupt Police Officers in Lake County, Illinois
Part 1: Social Networking Map
The infographic below is a social networking map which shows the child-molesting attorneys and educators, parental alienation committing attorneys, fraudulent psychiatrists who drug rape accuser patients with psychiatric medications, corrupt and racist police officers, and other corrupt officials, in Lake County, Illinois.
This image should help explain why I believe that it would be difficult for me to obtain a fair trial - or a trial at all - in my ongoing attempt to urge prosecutors to file charges against my father for molesting me in 1995 and 1996.
This is a quick-reference guide designed to help people who are new to, or unfamiliar with, my case, to understand the connections between the various attorneys, and other prominent people in Lake County, whom my father Richard Kopsick knows, and how he knows them.
Click, and open in new tab and/or window,
and download, to view in full resolution
Part 2: List of People
The text below consists of all people mentioned on the chart above (except for attorney Matt deMartini).
For the sake of including the maximum number of possible child predators in the Lake County legal system, I have also included the names of several people involved in parental alienation and child molestation cases whom are close to me.
I have also included the names of people involved in several well-known criminal cases from Lake County, all of which involved Coroner Dr. Thomas Rudd. I have included this information in order to help illustrate the general degree of corruption in the county, and also because Rudd was the coroner in State of Illinois v. Calusinski, a case in which my father Richard Kopsick and his friend Steve Scheller were both involved.
For the sake of including the maximum number of possible child predators in the Lake County legal system, I have also included the names of several people involved in parental alienation and child molestation cases whom are close to me.
I have also included the names of people involved in several well-known criminal cases from Lake County, all of which involved Coroner Dr. Thomas Rudd. I have included this information in order to help illustrate the general degree of corruption in the county, and also because Rudd was the coroner in State of Illinois v. Calusinski, a case in which my father Richard Kopsick and his friend Steve Scheller were both involved.
- Andersen, Brad
Managing broker at GGL Realty (Griffith, Grant, & Lackie) in Lake Bluff. Friend of Richard Kopsick. Used the
camgirl services of one of his friend’s daughters, who was in her early
twenties at the time.
http://www.facebook.com/justaskbrad/
http://www.facebook.com/justaskbrad/
- Bello, Evelyn
Former legal advocate at Zacharias
Sexual Abuse Center in Gurnee. Spoke to Lake Bluff police officer Lisa Malkov
about Joe Kopsick’s claims against Richard Kopsick. Told Joe Kopsick to wait
for the police to respond if and when contacted by Victor o’Block.
- Berry, Christine
Former therapist at Zacharias Sexual
Abuse Center. Provided counseling to Joe Kopsick between February and November
2020. Did not commit any acts of impropriety against Joe Kopsick.
- Boldt, Raymond Allen
Mundelein-based attorney. Accused by
Grayson “Kash” Jackson (born Benjamin Winderweedle) of parental alienation. Represented
Kash Jackson’s ex-wife in their custody battle Defended Jeffrey B. Hannah, a
youth pastor who pled guilty of sexual assault against several teenage girls.
Boldt motioned for Hannah to be able to visit his niece and nephew.
Source:
- Calusinski, Melissa (and sister)
After what could be described as a
coerced confession, Melissa Calusinski was convicted in 2012 of murdering a
baby at a child care facility in 2009. Richard Kopsick represented someone in
that case, possibly Calusinski’s sister or co-worker. Kopsick’s friend Steve
Scheller prosecuted Calusinski along with his associate Matt deMartini.
Source:
- Christensen, Judge Janelle
Presided over part of Kash Jackson’s
child custody case. Acted with prejudice in committing parental alienation
against Jackson.
- Collins, Judge Raymond D.
Judge in the 19th
Judicial Circuit Court of Illinois. Accused by Sam Gorg of parental alienation.
- del Re, David
Attorney in Waukegan. Accused by
parent Sam Gorg of working with Sol Rappaport to commit fraudulent litigation
of Gorg’s child custody and parental alienation case.
- Dick, Jonathan, and Dick, Susan
Proprietors of Sweet’s Ice Cream
store in Lake Forest. Parents of a student Joe Kopsick knew in high school. Accused,
by author and therapist Karen A. Fennell, of molesting Fennell’s children.
- Dunn, Dan
Friend of Richard Kopsick. Former
police officer in either Lake Bluff or Lake Forest. Joe Kopsick overheard Dunn
telling fellow police officer Carl Schons that the Jews owned most of the
factories in Germany, and therefore caused the pollution (implying that the
Jews deserved what was coming to them).
- Feld, Dr. Michael
Psychiatrist based in Northbrook.
Was recommended to treat Joe Kopsick, by Dr. Sol Rappaport, after Richard
Kopsick asked Rappaport to recommend a therapist. Joe Kopsick reported Feld to
the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulations in May 2021.
- Fennell, Karen A. (and family)
Formerly of Lake Bluff. Therapist,
and the author of Straying Towards Truth, a fictionalized account of
what to expect when a child in the family comes forward with allegations of
sexual abuse. Fennell claims that Jonathan and Susan Dick, the owners of
Sweet’s Ice Cream store in Lake Forest, molested her daughter or daughters.
Moved out of state after the alleged abuse.
- Gibson, Scott Boen
Waukegan-based attorney who lives in
Lake Forest. Long time friend of Richard Kopsick; vacationed together with
their families (including Union League Club Hotel in Chicago in December 1996).
Used to share office space with Kopsick. Pinched Joe Kopsick’s butt when he was
a child attending Gibson’s pool parties, and bragged that he was pinching child
guests’ butts by yelling “There’s a butt-biter in the pool” in front of other
parents, who did nothing about it. Denied pinching any children’s butts,
according to a mutual friend of Gibson and Joe Kopsick, in late June or early
July 2020. Once wrote a letter to Richard Kopsick saying that he was in Europe
and the heroin there was great. Recovering alcoholic. Divorced.
- Gliniewicz, Joseph
Deceased Fox Lake police officer.
Killed himself in a staged suicide on September 1st, 2015, prompting
suspicion of murder and a search for the alleged killers. The non-existent
suspects were described as ethnic minorities. Coroner Dr. Thomas Rudd revealed
that Gliniewicz committed suicide. Gliniewicz and his wife Melodie defrauded
the Youth Police Explorers Group.
Source:
- Gorg, Sam
Lake County parent. Published a
video alleging misconduct and intentional parental alienation by attorney David
del Re and psychiatrist Dr. Sol R. Rappaport in Gorg’s child custody case.
- Hannah, Jeffrey B.
Former youth pastor from Wildwood
who pled guilty to sexual assaults against teenage girls. Was defended by
attorney Raymond A. Boldt, who represented Kash Jackson’s wife in their child
custody battle.
Source:
- Hastert, J. Dennis
Former U.S. Representative from Illinois
and Republican Speaker of the House. Molested teenage boys while working as a basketball
coach (a commonality he shares with Kenneth Hasty).
- Hasty,
Kenneth
Waukegan man and former aldermanic
candidate. Defended by Richard Kopsick in 1993 for attempting to make sexual
advances towards a teenage boy while in his home. Had previously been accused
of child molestation and was on probation. Richard Kopsick urged continued probation.
Sources:
- Howell, Justus
Now deceased boy from Zion who was
shot to death by police at the age of 17. Coroner Dr. Thomas Rudd said that
Howell was shot in the back by the police.
Source:
- Jackson, Grayson “Kash”
Navy veteran, and former resident of
Antioch, Illinois. Gubernatorial nominee of the Libertarian Party of Illinois
in 2018. Accused Judge Joseph V. Salvi, Judge Janelle Christensen, and his ex-wife’s
attorney Raymond Allen Boldt, of committing parental alienation against him in
his child custody dispute.
- Jones, Kristin
Supervisor at Zacharias Sexual Abuse
Center in Gurnee. Referred Joe Kopsick to North Suburban Legal Aid Clinic after
Evelyn Bello stopped working at Zacharias.
- Kopsick, Joseph W.
Private security guard. Born in Lake
Forest on February 24th, 1987. Grew up in Lake Bluff, now lives in
Waukegan. Son of Richard S. Kopsick. Accused Richard S. Kopsick of criminal sexual
abuse, to Lake Bluff police, in December 2019 and March 2021. Studied political
science at the University of Wisconsin at Madison between 2005 and 2009. Blogger
and political researcher at the Aquarian Agrarian. Frequent candidate for U.S. House of Representatives.
- Kopsick, Richard S.
Personal injury, criminal defense,
and medical negligence attorney based in Waukegan. Born in Manhattan, New York
City, New York State on March 10th, 1957. Grew up in Lake Bluff.
Lives in Lake Bluff. Molested his oldest son Joseph W. Kopsick at 524 East
Washington Avenue, Lake Bluff, in 1995 and 1996. Defended accused child
molester Kenneth Hasty in 1993. Former friend of attorney Scott Gibson, who
pinched Joe Kopsick’s butt at his pool parties in the 1990s. Democrat, heavily involved with Lake County Democratic Party during the 1990s.
- Lichter, Sally
G.A.L. (Guardian Ad Litem) who charged Kash Jackson thousands of dollars to speak to his son over the phone.
- Malkov, Lisa
Police officer at the Lake Bluff Police
Department. Spoke to Joe Kopsick, and several people Kopsick suggested the
police interview, after each of Kopsick’s two visits to the Lake Bluff police (in
December 2019 and March 2021). Would contact Victor o’Block’s Special Victims
Unit office in the Lake County State’s Attorney if she determined that there
was enough evidence to charge Richard Kopsick with a crime.
- Miller, David “Dave”
Former theater director at Lake
Forest High School. Lives in Lake Bluff. Reports that Miller had had inappropriate
sexual relationships and text messages with teenage students, surfaced in 2009,
and then again in 2020 because the 2009 accusers wished to retain their
privacy.
Sources:
- Nerheim, Michael
Lake County State’s Attorney from
November 2012 to January 2021. Republican. Defeated by Democrat Eric Rinehart. Served
above prosecutor Victor o’Block when o’Block decided not to file charges
against Richard Kopsick in early 2020.
- o’Block, Victor
Prosecutor at the Special Victims
Unit of the Lake County State’s Attorney’s office. In the position to file
charges against Richard Kopsick when and if police determine that there is
enough evidence to do so. Decided not to file charges against Richard Kopsick
in March 2020 (but failed to notify Joe Kopsick, resulting in his not finding
out until two months later). Told Joe Kopsick, the first time they spoke (in
May 2020), that he would not file charges, and that if Kopsick wants legal
action, he should file a civil suit, or else go out of Lake County’s
jurisdiction to bring attention to the case.
- o’Hara, Kathleen
Former teacher and principal at Lake
Bluff Middle School. President and mayor of the Village of Lake Bluff since 2007.
Attended school board meetings with Richard Kopsick in the 1990s. Yelled at Joe
Kopsick in her principal’s office for using the word “pot” while trying to draw
attention to a very young boy who was using marijuana. Accused by Joe Kopsick, in 2020, of not doing enough to alert parents and the community about Diane M. Ross's 2000 arrest for soliciting child pornography.
Source:
- Rappaport, Dr. Sol R.
Libertyville-based psychiatrist. One
of the owners of Counseling Connections Therapeutic Day Schools. Co-founder of
four other therapeutic day schools. Youth counselor. Has presented on family
counseling and other topics for bar associations. Recommended Dr. Michael Feld
to Richard Kopsick, for the purposes of providing psychiatric counseling to Joe
Kopsick, in March 2015. Knew that Richard Kopsick wanted his son and victim Joe
Kopsick medicated, when he recommended Feld.
- Rinehart, Eric
Lake County State’s Attorney since
January 2021 (defeated incumbent Republican Michael Nerheim). Democrat. Praised
the work done by Zacharias Sexual Abuse Center while on David Rych’s Reality
Radio show on WRLR 98.3 FM Lake County in late 2020. Works in the same office
as prosecutor Victor o’Block, whom is in a position to file charges against
Richard Kopsick but has not done so.
- Ross, Diane M.
Former English professor at Lake Forest
College. Lived in Lake Bluff. Mother of two students who attended Lake Bluff schools with Joe
Kopsick. Arrested in 2000 for posing as a 13-year-old girl in order to send child pornography over the internet.
Sources:
- Rossetti, Judge Victoria “Vicky”
Judge in the 19th Judicial
Circuit Court of Illinois. Married to attorney Doug Zeit, who shares office
space with Richard Kopsick. Friend of Richard Kopsick.
- Rudd, Dr. Thomas
Former Lake County Coroner. Involved
in the cases of Joseph Gliniewicz (police officer suicide), Melissa Calusinski
(infant homicide), and Justus Howell (shot by police).
- Salvi, Judge Joseph V.
Presided over part of Kash Jackson’s
child custody case. Acted with prejudice in committing parental alienation
against Jackson.
- Scheller, Steve
Former defense attorney. Prosecutor,
along with associate Matt deMartini, in Melissa Calusinski’s trial for the
alleged murder of infant Benjamin Kingan. Conspired with deMartini to depict
Calusinski as an intentional murderer when the cause of the baby’s death was
unintentional homicide. Scheller and/or deMartini, probably intentionally, failed
to lighten X-ray evidence which showed that the baby had previous injuries. Friend
of Richard Kopsick, who represented Calusinski’s sister and/or co-worker in
relation to the case.
Source:
- Schons, Carl
Former Chief of Police of the Lake
Bluff Police Department. Friend of Richard Kopsick and officer Dan Dunn. Did
not push back against Dunn when Dunn whispered to Schons that the Jews in
Germany ran most of the factories and therefore were responsible for most of
the pollution.
- Vorderstrasse, Judge Donna-Jo
Presided over part of Kash Jackson’s
child custody case. Acted with prejudice in committing parental alienation
against Jackson.
- Wright, Dr. Vernice
Therapist at Truth Youth and Family
Services, L.L.C., based in Waukegan. Provided cognitive behavior therapy to Joe
Kopsick in early 2021. Did not commit any acts of impropriety against Joe Kopsick.
- Zeit, Douglas E. “Doug”
Waukegan-based attorney. Shares
office space with Richard Kopsick. Friend of Richard Kopsick. Married to Judge
Victoria “Vicky” Rossetti.
- [Name unknown]
Old man accused of molesting kids in
Lake Bluff public pool showers.
- [Name unknown] [not mentioned in the infographic]
Unknown adult male in the community who molested a male student who attended Lake Bluff schools with Joe Kopsick.
- [Name unknown] [not mentioned in the infographic]
Unknown adult male in the community who molested a male student who attended Lake Bluff schools with Joe Kopsick.
- [Name unknown] [not mentioned in the infographic]
Unknown adult male in the community who molested and/or raped his daughter, who attended Lake Forest High School with Joe Kopsick.
- [Names unknown] [not mentioned in the infographic]
Unknown adults in the community who may have conspired to keep the David Miller and/or Diane M. Ross child sex crime scandals a secret.
- [Name unknown] [not mentioned in the infographic]
Unknown adult male in the community who molested a male student who attended Lake Bluff schools with Joe Kopsick.
- [Name unknown] [not mentioned in the infographic]
Unknown adult male in the community who molested a male student who attended Lake Bluff schools with Joe Kopsick.
- [Name unknown] [not mentioned in the infographic]
Unknown adult male in the community who molested and/or raped his daughter, who attended Lake Forest High School with Joe Kopsick.
- [Names unknown] [not mentioned in the infographic]
Unknown adults in the community who may have conspired to keep the David Miller and/or Diane M. Ross child sex crime scandals a secret.
- [Names unknown] [not mentioned in the infographic]
Unknown sailors at Great Lakes Naval Base (in Great Lakes, Illinois) who committed statutory rape against one or more young teen underage girls, at least as young as 12 or 13 years old. At least one of such girls may have been acting, at the time, as an underage prostitute, pimped by her father. This occurred some time between 1999 and 2002.
Created on May 21st, 24th, and 25th, 2021
Originally published on May 25th, 2021
under the title
"Social Networking Map of Child Molesting Attorneys,
Fraudulent Psychiatrists, and Racist Police Officers
in Lake County, Illinois"
Edited and Expanded on July 30th, 2021
under the title
"Social Networking Map of Child Molesting Attorneys,
Fraudulent Psychiatrists, and Racist Police Officers
in Lake County, Illinois"
Edited and Expanded on July 30th, 2021
Monday, May 17, 2021
Establishing a Typology of Potential Child Sexual Predators Based on Whether and Why They Offend
Introduction
I have written this article, and created the infographics below, in continuation of the research I published in my May 2021 article "Dismantling Five Myths About Child Molesters That Are Helping Them Evade Notice, Capture, and Judgment".
That article can be read at the following link:
The first infographic can be found in the original article, linked above.
The second infographic is new.
I have created this typology - consisting of eight categories of people, six of which are pedophiles and/or child molesters - for several reasons.
The primary reason is to clarify the distinctions between child molesters and pedophiles, and people who fit into both categories, and people who fit into neither. Another reason is to highlight the distinction between pedophiles who love children in one or more ways, versus predators who target children mostly out of feelings of hatred.
I believe that this is necessary, to establish an accurate nomenclature to describe predators who harm children sexually, but do not have either romantic feelings, nor feelings of sexual attraction, towards the children they victimize. The idea of calling such people "pedophiles" (which literally means "child lover") does not adequately describe them. [I have classified these people as Type 6; what I call the "Sadistic Abuser".]
I believe that this is necessary, to establish an accurate nomenclature to describe predators who harm children sexually, but do not have either romantic feelings, nor feelings of sexual attraction, towards the children they victimize. The idea of calling such people "pedophiles" (which literally means "child lover") does not adequately describe them. [I have classified these people as Type 6; what I call the "Sadistic Abuser".]
Of course, none of this is to imply, of course, that a person who molests a child because they love them, is necessarily any less dangerous than a person who molests a child because they hate them.
The purpose of this article is to caution parents that some people might pretend to love their kids in order to get close to them and harm them sexually, while while other people might pretend to hate their kids in order to get close to them and harm them sexually.
Love of children or hatred of children may be used, as someone's cover, for molesting children.
I believe that it will also be helpful - to police, criminal psychologists, and psychiatrists - to have a typology of potential child sex criminals, because these professions, and parents, should should be familiar with several paradoxes related to child molesters.
The first is that - as I explained in "Dismantling Five Myths About Child Molesters That Are Helping Them Evade Notice, Capture, and Judgment" - not all child molesters are pedophiles, and not all child molesters are pedophiles.
The second is that some people love children so much - including inappropriately - that they cannot bring themselves to molest a child; while other people hate children, and cannot bring themselves to molest a child due to that hatred, despite having a sexual attraction to children.
The former class of people is called "Righteous pedophiles" or non-offending pedophiles; which I have labeled as Type 1. The latter class of people may be rare, and may even not exist. But still, it's logically possible that there are child-attracted child-hating non-offenders. I have labeled that class as Type 2 (the "hateful pervert" or "repulsed non-offender").
Another important paradox to keep in mind - which is a major reason why I developed this typology - is that some child molesters feel romantic feelings, or even (what they would describe as) feelings of love, towards their victims and potential victims.
[Note: In the typology, I have grouped people with healthy affection towards children, together with people who develop romantic feelings towards children. I have only done this in order to distinguish those who have mostly hatred towards children, from those who have mostly love towards children. I do not mean to imply that romantic feelings towards children, and affection, are the same thing; I have only done this for the sake of simplicity. I welcome my readers' attempts to refine this typology and make it more precise.]
Some abusers even shower their victims with gifts, to manipulate them and stop them from coming forward about the abuse. This is particularly common in familial relationships which involve C.S.A. (child sexual abuse and/or assault). To cite a real-life example, Jeffrey Epstein paid for some of his victims to have housing and to get through college. Abusers like this use the fact that they have helped their victim, to get the victim to put up with more abuse.
It is important to remember that some offenders fall in love with their minor and child victims, because it helps us remember that someone who is especially affectionate towards children, could just as easily be a pedophile, as they could be a normal person.
Abuse does not always look like abuse. Sometimes it looks like a loving relationship. It's important to know the warning signs of abuse, to watch for them, and to think about what you have seen.
The former class of people is called "Righteous pedophiles" or non-offending pedophiles; which I have labeled as Type 1. The latter class of people may be rare, and may even not exist. But still, it's logically possible that there are child-attracted child-hating non-offenders. I have labeled that class as Type 2 (the "hateful pervert" or "repulsed non-offender").
Another important paradox to keep in mind - which is a major reason why I developed this typology - is that some child molesters feel romantic feelings, or even (what they would describe as) feelings of love, towards their victims and potential victims.
[Note: In the typology, I have grouped people with healthy affection towards children, together with people who develop romantic feelings towards children. I have only done this in order to distinguish those who have mostly hatred towards children, from those who have mostly love towards children. I do not mean to imply that romantic feelings towards children, and affection, are the same thing; I have only done this for the sake of simplicity. I welcome my readers' attempts to refine this typology and make it more precise.]
Some abusers even shower their victims with gifts, to manipulate them and stop them from coming forward about the abuse. This is particularly common in familial relationships which involve C.S.A. (child sexual abuse and/or assault). To cite a real-life example, Jeffrey Epstein paid for some of his victims to have housing and to get through college. Abusers like this use the fact that they have helped their victim, to get the victim to put up with more abuse.
It is important to remember that some offenders fall in love with their minor and child victims, because it helps us remember that someone who is especially affectionate towards children, could just as easily be a pedophile, as they could be a normal person.
Abuse does not always look like abuse. Sometimes it looks like a loving relationship. It's important to know the warning signs of abuse, to watch for them, and to think about what you have seen.
One way of visualizing the information
Click, and open in new tab or window, and download,
to see in full resolution.
Two Types of People Who Don't Harm Children Sexually and Don't Want To
1. Normal person with a healthy love for children
(shown in light green;
loves children emotionally but not romantically, not attracted to children sexually, does not offend)
1. Normal person with a healthy love for children
(shown in light green;
loves children emotionally but not romantically, not attracted to children sexually, does not offend)
2. Non-child-attracted non-pedophile child-hater, a/k/a "normal person" who hates children but doesn't sexually harm them
(shown in medium green;
does not love children emotionally nor romantically, not attracted to children sexually, does not offend)
Six Types of People Who Harm Children Sexually and/or May Want To
Type 1: "NON-OFFENDING PEDOPHILE" / "'RIGHTEOUS' PEDOPHILE"
(i.e., a non-offending child-attracted pedophile)
[shown in orange;
loves children emotionally and romantically. attracted to children sexually, does not offend]
This type of person is a pedophile, but not a child molester. This is sometimes called a "Righteous pedophile" (meaning a person who is sexually attracted to children but does not offend), or a non-offending pedophile. This type of person has inappropriate sexual feelings towards children, and also has romantic feelings and emotional attachments to children.
This type of pedophile loves children so much that it is inappropriate and sexual, but the intense emotional love of children also prevents the pedophile from offending against children in his or her lifetime. This type of pedophile often wishes that they weren't a pedophile, due to the conflicting feelings they have, being sexually attracted to children while also feeling love and compassion for them.
To clarify: The fact that someone qualifies as a "righteous pedophile" or "non-offending pedophile", or has been identified as such, does not necessarily mean that they will never offend. Some pedophiles will try to be "righteous pedophiles" who refrain from offending, but will fail. Those Type 1 Righteous Pedophiles who give into the temptation to offend, and hurt a child, will fall into the Type 3 category, the child-molesting child-attracted pedophile.
Type 2: "HATEFUL PERVERT" or "REPULSED NON-OFFENDER"
(i.e., a non-offending child-attracted child-hater)
[shown in brown;
does not love children emotionally nor romantically, attracted to children sexually, does not offend]
This type of person hates children and feels no emotional attachment to them, and is attracted to children sexually, but does not end up offending in their lifetime. Type 2 individuals are attracted to children sexually, but not emotionally, nor do they develop romantic feelings for children. It's possible that people in this category are too repulsed by their emotional hatred of children, to harm them in a sexual way.
This is not to say, however, that a Type 2 individual could never molest a child; Type 2 is just the class one falls under if one does not offend during one's lifetime, and is also sexually attracted to children, but not emotionally compassionate towards them. If a Type 2 "Hateful Pervert" or "Repulsed Non-Offender" commits a sex crime against a child, then that person becomes a Type 5 "Hateful Child Molester" or "Perverted Hateful Abuser".
Type 3: "CHILD-MOLESTING PEDOPHILE" / "CLASSIC PEDOPHILE" / "CHILD-LOVING ABUSER" / "CHILD-WOOING ABUSER"
(i.e., a child-molesting child-attracted pedophile)
[shown in light blue;
loves children emotionally and romantically, attracted to children sexually, does offend]
A Type 3 individual is both sexually attracted to children, and emotionally and/or romantically in love with one or more children. This type of person acts on their sexual and romantic feelings, and will often use those romantic feelings to justify the sexual urges they are feeling (i.e., romanticizing their feelings), and act on those feelings.
This type is probably more likely than the other types to be mentally ill or retarded, especially emotionally immature, and/or sexually immature in some way, which makes it difficult for them to relate to adults socially and sexually at the level at which one would expect a fully developed adult to interact.
A "Righteous Pedophile" or non-offending pedophile (Type 1) will become a Type 3, if that individual fails to refrain from harming a child sexually.
Type 4: "REPRESSED CHILD MOLESTER" / "TICKING TIME-BOMB ABUSER" / "UNWITTING ABUSER"
(i.e., a non-child-attracted child-molesting pedophile)
[shown in pink;
loves children emotionally, not consciously attracted to children sexually, does offend]
A Type 4 individual is not consciously attracted to children, and believes themselves to love children in a healthy way. But a Type 4 person is also an offending pedophile. A person who is abused as a child, and then forgets that abuse, and then finds oneself suddenly accused of molesting a child - and they have no idea why they did it, but are beginning to recover their own childhood memories of abuse - likely falls into the category of Type 4.
Such a person may be said to be subconsciously sexually attracted to children, due to their prior abuse. Due to their prior abuse, they may also have subconscious resentment, and/or survivor guilt, regarding children who have not suffered any sexual abuse. This may motivate them to find a victim, as a way to transfer the trauma they suffered.
Such a person may be said to be subconsciously sexually attracted to children, due to their prior abuse. Due to their prior abuse, they may also have subconscious resentment, and/or survivor guilt, regarding children who have not suffered any sexual abuse. This may motivate them to find a victim, as a way to transfer the trauma they suffered.
Type 5: "HATEFUL CHILD MOLESTER" / "PERVERTED HATEFUL ABUSER"
(i.e., a child-molesting, child-attracted non-pedophile)
[shown in medium blue;
does not love children emotionally nor romantically, attracted to children sexually, does offend]
This type of person hates children, and wants to harm them - sexually, and possibly also physically, and maybe other ways as well - due to that hate. Type 5 individuals do offend in their lifetimes, and violate children sexually due to both hatred and sexual attraction. Type 5 individuals do not feel any emotional attachment, nor romantic love, for children.
If a Type 2 "Hateful Pervert" or "Repulsed Non-Offender" commits a sex crime against a child, then that person becomes a Type 5 "Hateful Child Molester" or "Perverted Hateful Abuser".
Type 6: "SADISTIC CHILD MOLESTER" / "UNATTRACTED SADISTIC ABUSER"
(i.e., a non-child attracted child-hating child molester)
[shown in medium red;
does not love children emotionally nor romantically, not attracted to children sexually, does offend]
This type of person hates children, and wants to harm them due to that hate. Type 6 individuals do not feel any emotional attachment, nor romantic love, for children. Although Type 6 individuals are not sexually attracted to children, they commit sex crimes against children for reasons of power and control - and in order to take advantage of children's vulnerability - rather than due to sexual attraction or romantic or emotional interest.
If a person who hated children were on the track to becoming a Type 6 "Sadistic Abuser" - but somehow managed to avoid offending against any children during their lifetime - then that person would belong to the non-pedophilic type which I have shown in medium green in the infographics; that is, a so-called "normal" person who hates children (and is not sexually attracted to them).
If a person who hated children were on the track to becoming a Type 6 "Sadistic Abuser" - but somehow managed to avoid offending against any children during their lifetime - then that person would belong to the non-pedophilic type which I have shown in medium green in the infographics; that is, a so-called "normal" person who hates children (and is not sexually attracted to them).
Conclusion
I hope that a deeper and more detailed understanding about the various and overlapping causes of pedophilic attraction, will lead to proper diagnoses regarding typology of potential child sexual predators.
I also hope that this typology will be helpful in designing psychiatric treatment specialized towards each particular type of pedophile and potential offender. The wrong diagnosis, or the wrong cure, could make the problem worse.
As I have explained, for some people, hating children keeps them from offending, while for others, loving children keeps them from offending. Therapies for each given condition, should reflect an awareness of these facts.
[Note:
It may also be useful to establish a typology of potential child sexual predators, based on whether they are: 1) attracted to men, women, or both; and 2) whether they are exclusively attracted to minors, or are attracted to both minors and adults.]
Images created, article written, and blog entry published
on May 17th, 2021
Edited and Expanded on May 24th, 2021
Edited and Expanded on May 24th, 2021
Saturday, May 8, 2021
Dismantling Five Myths About Child Molesters That Are Helping Them Evade Notice, Capture, and Judgment
Table of Contents
1. Introduction:
Definitions of Paraphilias
2. Dismantling Myth #1: The False Idea That All Child Molesters Are Exclusively
Attracted to Children
3. Dismantling Myth #2: The False Idea That All Child Molesters Are Exclusively
Attracted to the Gender They Victimize
4. Dismantling Myth #3: The False Idea That All Child Molesters Are Pedophiles and Vice-Versa
5. Dismantling Myth #4: The False Idea That All Child Molesters Have Hundreds of
Victims
6. Dismantling Myth #5: The False Idea That All Child Molesters Inflict Grievous Harm or
Visible Injuries
7. Conclusion
Content
1. Introduction: Definitions of Paraphilias
Ephebophilia is the primary
sexual attraction to people aged approximately fifteen to nineteen years old.
Hebephilia is the primary sexual
attraction to children aged approximately eleven or twelve to fourteen years
old.
Pedophilia is generally defined as
the primary sexual attraction to very young children, below the age of ten
years old.
Infantophilia (or nepiophilia) is
the primary sexual attraction to children aged five or younger.
These classes of paraphilic sexual
attraction towards young people, are accepted among the psychiatric community,
and several of these classes are listed in the D.S.M.-5 (the Diagnostic and
Statistic Manual of Mental Disorders).
If you first heard about these classes of
sexual attraction outside of a criminological or psychiatric
context, then you are probably familiar with the ongoing effort - by N.A.M.B.L.A., and organizations affiliated with the so-called “pedosexual” movement - to legitimize and normalize sexual relations between adults and minors, and to defend adult sexual attraction to minors, and to fight for the recognition of a freedom to act upon that attraction.
Such organizations, and their supporters (almost all of whom are pedophiles), often cite the existence of different classes of age-based paraphilic sexual attraction, to downplay the seriousness of adult sexual attraction to minors, and to downplay the dangerous consequences of acting on that attraction.
While it is factually accurate to point out that ephebophilia - the primary attraction to teenagers - is different from pedophilic attraction to children, that fact does not make sexual relations between adults and teenagers (i.e., rape) any safer. Also, the fact that a person is attracted to teenagers, does not necessarily mean that they are not attracted to even younger children as well.
It is not the aim of this article, to defend sexual attraction to minors (i.e., ephebophilia, hebephilia, pedophilia, and infantophilia), nor acting upon that attraction, at any age or age range.
Such organizations, and their supporters (almost all of whom are pedophiles), often cite the existence of different classes of age-based paraphilic sexual attraction, to downplay the seriousness of adult sexual attraction to minors, and to downplay the dangerous consequences of acting on that attraction.
While it is factually accurate to point out that ephebophilia - the primary attraction to teenagers - is different from pedophilic attraction to children, that fact does not make sexual relations between adults and teenagers (i.e., rape) any safer. Also, the fact that a person is attracted to teenagers, does not necessarily mean that they are not attracted to even younger children as well.
It is not the aim of this article, to defend sexual attraction to minors (i.e., ephebophilia, hebephilia, pedophilia, and infantophilia), nor acting upon that attraction, at any age or age range.
I want to make it absolutely clear:
All sexual relations between people over the age of 18, and people below the
age of 16, should be condemned, illegal, and punished.
In my opinion, states should come
together to draft a uniform standard regarding whether the age of consent
should be 17, and whether and how Romeo and Juliet laws can help solve the
problem.
I have explained my thoughts regarding
legal solutions to this, at length, before; in my 2020 platform regarding child
protection and sexual consent laws, which I called the Safe Kids Amendment
(S.K.A.).
I only mention the difference between the age classes of paraphilic attraction to minors, in order to explain that the differing
definitions of these classes, makes it difficult to diagnose people as the
exact class of pedophile that they are.
This is important to talk about, because fussing over definitions can make it difficult to easily identify, and properly label, an adult who is suspected of being a pedophile or suspected of having molested a child.
If the family of the victim is distracted by arguing about which term to use to describe the suspected abuser - "if" that person is indeed guilty - then the family will be unlikely to believe the person claiming abuse. Police, and the families of the people involved in the accusation, might have difficulty accepting that the accused person exactly matches the description offered by the person claiming to be their victim.
Physical evidence is what matters most in these cases, but family members failing to notice an accused abuser's past patterns of abuse, could cause the family's secret pain to stay secret, instead of being noticed by investigators. Those family abusers who exhibit signs of narcissism or psychopathy will often inflict emotional abuse and psychological manipulation on their entire families - often more and more over the years, gradually, without them even noticing - in order to cover-up and/or distract from the physical and/or sexual abuse they committed in secret. Thus, the abuser's success in keeping the whole family in silence, confusion, and argumentation among themselves, should be recognized by investigators as something which could prevent the full disclosure of evidence related to the case.
To put it another way, suspected child molesters often inflict emotional abuse which should be understood to function as a destruction or suppression of evidence, because of the chilling effect which that abuse creates on the family members' freedom of speech,
If the family of the victim is distracted by arguing about which term to use to describe the suspected abuser - "if" that person is indeed guilty - then the family will be unlikely to believe the person claiming abuse. Police, and the families of the people involved in the accusation, might have difficulty accepting that the accused person exactly matches the description offered by the person claiming to be their victim.
Physical evidence is what matters most in these cases, but family members failing to notice an accused abuser's past patterns of abuse, could cause the family's secret pain to stay secret, instead of being noticed by investigators. Those family abusers who exhibit signs of narcissism or psychopathy will often inflict emotional abuse and psychological manipulation on their entire families - often more and more over the years, gradually, without them even noticing - in order to cover-up and/or distract from the physical and/or sexual abuse they committed in secret. Thus, the abuser's success in keeping the whole family in silence, confusion, and argumentation among themselves, should be recognized by investigators as something which could prevent the full disclosure of evidence related to the case.
To put it another way, suspected child molesters often inflict emotional abuse which should be understood to function as a destruction or suppression of evidence, because of the chilling effect which that abuse creates on the family members' freedom of speech,
Since it's possible for someone to be a pedophile but not a child molester - and since it's arguably possible for someone to be a "serial child molester" without having multiple victims - it's important to explain the differences between definitions, and to explain stereotypes that are making it difficult to identify child sex criminals.
Throughout the remainder of this article, I will explain what I believe are the top five "harmful stereotypes" about pedophiles and child molesters. But these stereotypes do not harm child molesters; they are harming children; by helping child molesters evade notice, capture, and judgment.
These stereotypes are as follows:
1) some child molesters are attracted to adults in addition to children;
2) some child molesters are bisexual;
3) not all pedophiles become child molesters;
4) some child molesters only have one or a few victims, rather than many; and
5) injuries will not always be visible after a child has been molested.
These stereotypes are as follows:
1) some child molesters are attracted to adults in addition to children;
2) some child molesters are bisexual;
3) not all pedophiles become child molesters;
4) some child molesters only have one or a few victims, rather than many; and
5) injuries will not always be visible after a child has been molested.
2. Dismantling Myth #1: The False Idea That All Child Molesters Are Exclusively Attracted to Children
As I stated above, one common
definition of pedophilia is that it is the primary sexual attraction to
children age ten years and below.
We might conclude, therefore - from that,
and from the fact that infantophilia pertains to attraction to children age
five and below - that “pedophile” might most accurately apply to people whom
are primarily attracted to children between the ages of five and ten.
While one common definition of
pedophilia is that it is the primary sexual attraction to children age
ten and below, there is another definition, which some people accept,
which I do not think is correct. This definition is that pedophiles are exclusively
attracted to children under ten, rather than primarily.
What is the difference, you might
ask? Again, to be clear, there is certainly no difference in an ethical or
moral sense, between someone who is exclusively, versus primarily,
attracted to children. And certainly, some - maybe even many - pedophiles are exclusively attracted to children.
But the difference on which I wish to
focus, comes in the difference seen in the difficulty establishing an M.O. (i.e.,
a modus operandi; that is, a mode of operating), when we make
unfounded assumptions about child molestation suspects that are based on
possibly false definitions.
If we define pedophilia to mean "a person who is exclusively attracted to children", then we risk making
the mistake – whether consciously or unconsciously – to reject, with prejudice,
the possibility that a person suspected of molesting a child, might have done
what he or she is accused of, because they’re mostly (but not
exclusively) attracted to children.
If the "exclusively attracted" definition of pedophilia were officially or universally accepted, then it would be technically correct that a person who is secretly molesting his child while maintaining a sexual relationship with his spouse, is not a pedophile (because the fact that he's attracted to his wife, means he's not exclusively attracted to his child).
There is a difference between a definition being technically correct or legally accurate, and the definition being helpful, or easy to understand. Ideally it should be easy enough for a child to understand it, because a child might have to make a claim that abuse occurred.
The fact that a child's attacker is attracted to adults in addition to children, does not mean that the child suffered any less, nor that the attacker is any less dangerous. It might even mean that the person in question is more unpredictable than someone who is exclusively attracted to either children or adults.
If the "exclusively attracted" definition of pedophilia were officially or universally accepted, then it would be technically correct that a person who is secretly molesting his child while maintaining a sexual relationship with his spouse, is not a pedophile (because the fact that he's attracted to his wife, means he's not exclusively attracted to his child).
There is a difference between a definition being technically correct or legally accurate, and the definition being helpful, or easy to understand. Ideally it should be easy enough for a child to understand it, because a child might have to make a claim that abuse occurred.
The fact that a child's attacker is attracted to adults in addition to children, does not mean that the child suffered any less, nor that the attacker is any less dangerous. It might even mean that the person in question is more unpredictable than someone who is exclusively attracted to either children or adults.
To illustrate the risks involved in misunderstanding, or disagreeing about, definitions, let’s take an
example from pop culture. In Vladimir Nabokov’s Lolita, Humbert Humbert
married a woman in order to have a sexual affair with her underage daughter.
Taking an example from real life: Jeffrey
Epstein maintained a sexual relationship with Ghislaine Maxwell (his girlfriend,
handler, and assigned protectee) while they were sexually abusing teenage girls
together and apart. Not only that, but French fashion designer Jean-Luc Brunel
once wrote a note to Epstein saying that he had “a” girl for Epstein, whose age
was “8 x 2”. This might refer to a sixteen-year-old, but if you’ve heard the
rumors of Epstein’s interest in twelve-year-old French triplets, it’s just as
likely that this might refer to two eight-year-olds.
Moreover, plenty of men marry women,
and then cheat on their wives with their wives’ daughters from previous
marriages (i.e., their step-daughters). Some survivors of domestic abuse
have posted on social media sites that their stepfathers had sex with them, and
then their mothers blamed their own daughters for seducing the mother’s
boyfriend or husband. This is often followed by the daughter telling the mother
that it’s the mother’s fault for allowing it, or for choosing a boyfriend or
husband who is a pedophile.
3. Dismantling Myth #2: The False Idea That All Child Molesters Are Exclusively Attracted to the Gender They Victimize
If it is conceivable that a man can
rape or molest his daughter or stepdaughter, without being exclusively
attracted to minors, then why should it be inconceivable that a man could marry
a woman, and then go on to develop a sexual attraction towards his own son or
sons?
What I am about to say is not in
any way a knock against same-sex marriage, nor is intended to promote
suspicion of gay couples. But it is possible for a homosexual man to
disguise his attraction to men, and marry a woman.
In American slang, the woman is known as the man’s “beard”. This is because – like a beard – she creates a false vision of manliness for her husband. Such a man could undoubtedly molest his son, using the false claim that he is straight, to provide a cover or alibi, if he is accused of that type of same-sex relation. In the case of a man using his wife to provide a cover for molesting his son, that man's wife becomes a beard for the man's pedophilia rather than his homosexuality.
In American slang, the woman is known as the man’s “beard”. This is because – like a beard – she creates a false vision of manliness for her husband. Such a man could undoubtedly molest his son, using the false claim that he is straight, to provide a cover or alibi, if he is accused of that type of same-sex relation. In the case of a man using his wife to provide a cover for molesting his son, that man's wife becomes a beard for the man's pedophilia rather than his homosexuality.
Aside from gay men who marry women to
cover their homosexuality, there are also bisexual men who marry women because
they’d rather marry a woman than a man. Early 20th century
American songwriter Cole Porter, and his wife Linda, are one example of a
couple that fit that description. [Note: Cole Porter didn’t molest his son, because
he didn’t have any children. But I don’t care to speculate on whether Porter
was a pedophile, since nothing would suggest that. The point is that a man can
be attracted to both males and females, and then marry a woman, get her
pregnant, and have a son, and potentially molest that son.]
Additionally, there have been
incidents in which children and teenagers have been coaxed into watching
pornography by adults, and then gone on to molest, rape, and/or torture other (usually
smaller) children. From the fact that these children molest younger children because
they saw porn that probably featured adults, we can reasonably conclude that in
most cases like this, the child will grow up to be attracted to both
children and adults for the rest of their life (unless they get successful
therapy for the abuse they suffered).
Bisexual pedophiles do exist. A man, or a woman, could be bisexual (that is, attracted to both men and women), have children, and molest either their son or their daughter, or both. A pedophile's sexual attraction doesn't always determine which sex they are likely to victimize, but we shouldn't underestimate the likelihood that a person's choice in a victim, reflects sexual attraction in addition to the urge to dominate someone smaller and more vulnerable (i.e., that it reflects both sexual attraction and the abuser's penchant for violence).
Bisexual pedophiles do exist. A man, or a woman, could be bisexual (that is, attracted to both men and women), have children, and molest either their son or their daughter, or both. A pedophile's sexual attraction doesn't always determine which sex they are likely to victimize, but we shouldn't underestimate the likelihood that a person's choice in a victim, reflects sexual attraction in addition to the urge to dominate someone smaller and more vulnerable (i.e., that it reflects both sexual attraction and the abuser's penchant for violence).
I say none of the above in order to promote
or excuse unfounded suspicion of child molestation on the part of anyone
matching the descriptions listed above.
I am merely illustrating several
real-life and fictional examples which show that not all people who molest
children are exclusively attracted to children.
4. Dismantling Myth #3: The False Idea That All Child Molesters Are Pedophiles and Vice-Versa
I also wish to make it clear that not
all pedophiles are child molesters, and not all child molesters are pedophiles.
I say “not all pedophiles are child
molesters” because some adults are primarily or exclusively attracted to
children, but do not go on to offend. Some of these people call themselves “righteous
pedophiles”, but I do not say this to affirm the righteousness of being a
pedophile. There is none. There is righteousness, however, in not offending,
needless to say.
I say “not all child molesters are
pedophiles” because it’s possible that some people who molest children, are not
primarily attracted to children, or at least are not consciously
attracted to children.
For example, suppose that someone were molested as a child, and the abuse were so traumatic that they forgot the abuse, and they went on to molest a child while lacking memory of their own abuse. Such a person would probably claim, when caught, that they “don’t know what came over” them. They might even realize, after molesting the child, that they think they did it because they were abused as a child, and are now recovering memories of their childhood abuse.
Furthermore, the word pedophile literally means "child lover". To be clear, when a child is molested, there is no difference for that child whether the person who molested them, did it because they hate children, or because they "love children too much". But the fact remains: Some people who molest children love children too much, while some people molest children because they hate children.
There are people - like Jimmy Savile, for example - who admit to hating children, yet raped children. Of course, Savile claimed that he hated children, in order to dismiss accusations that he raped children. But when Savile says he hates children, we should believe him; that is probably the one thing he was telling the truth about. I find it hard to imagine Savile falling in love with any of the sick and dying children he raped on their deathbeds.
I say this not to downplay the seriousness of sex crimes perpetrated by people who don't hate children. I merely wish to point out that there are people who profess to hate children, yet will be around them (in order to rape them). This is important to think about because it is easy to dismiss the possibility that a person who claims to hate children, could be abusing them when they're left alone with them nd nobody is looking.
I also wish to point out that there are people who say they love children, and do love children, but are still risks to children (i.e., because they "love children too much"). Many of such people could probably be adequately described as mentally ill pedophiles who have not only a sexual attraction to children (or one or the other gender, or both genders, of children), but also particular romantic feelings towards one or more children in particular. Such people may use their love for children, as a cover for their pedophilia, and/or as a justification for their feelings.
Such people may be just as much of a potential danger towards children, as someone who professes to hate children (whether that child-hater is a child sex criminal or not).
For example, suppose that someone were molested as a child, and the abuse were so traumatic that they forgot the abuse, and they went on to molest a child while lacking memory of their own abuse. Such a person would probably claim, when caught, that they “don’t know what came over” them. They might even realize, after molesting the child, that they think they did it because they were abused as a child, and are now recovering memories of their childhood abuse.
Furthermore, the word pedophile literally means "child lover". To be clear, when a child is molested, there is no difference for that child whether the person who molested them, did it because they hate children, or because they "love children too much". But the fact remains: Some people who molest children love children too much, while some people molest children because they hate children.
There are people - like Jimmy Savile, for example - who admit to hating children, yet raped children. Of course, Savile claimed that he hated children, in order to dismiss accusations that he raped children. But when Savile says he hates children, we should believe him; that is probably the one thing he was telling the truth about. I find it hard to imagine Savile falling in love with any of the sick and dying children he raped on their deathbeds.
I say this not to downplay the seriousness of sex crimes perpetrated by people who don't hate children. I merely wish to point out that there are people who profess to hate children, yet will be around them (in order to rape them). This is important to think about because it is easy to dismiss the possibility that a person who claims to hate children, could be abusing them when they're left alone with them nd nobody is looking.
I also wish to point out that there are people who say they love children, and do love children, but are still risks to children (i.e., because they "love children too much"). Many of such people could probably be adequately described as mentally ill pedophiles who have not only a sexual attraction to children (or one or the other gender, or both genders, of children), but also particular romantic feelings towards one or more children in particular. Such people may use their love for children, as a cover for their pedophilia, and/or as a justification for their feelings.
Such people may be just as much of a potential danger towards children, as someone who professes to hate children (whether that child-hater is a child sex criminal or not).
To say that “not all child
molesters are pedophiles” is not to reduce suspicion of anybody.
Most - and probably even nearly all - child molesters, are pedophiles, in fact. To say otherwise would be
ridiculous, unless it happened that most molested children were assaulted by
people who had no sexual attraction to children, or very little as compared to
their attraction to adults.
The point is that you have to be watchful of both child haters and child lovers who may wish to harm your children - and you have to be aware of how they may wish to use hate or love as a cover for harming children.
The point is that you have to be watchful of both child haters and child lovers who may wish to harm your children - and you have to be aware of how they may wish to use hate or love as a cover for harming children.
Hopefully the following three infographics, which show three different methods of visualizing this information, will help the reader understand the differences between child molesters and pedophiles.
This diagram shows that
child molesting pedophiles are both
child molesters and pedophiles;
while there also exist
child molesters whom are not pedophiles,
as well as pedophiles whom are not child molesters.
This diagram shows what happens when you combine
categories of offense with the
pedophile vs. child molester category.
Since "offending non-offending pedophiles"
and "non-offending child molesters"
and "non-offending child molesters"
do not exist, only four types of
potential child sex offenders are shown here.
This diagram shows, and compares and contrasts,
six types of potential child sex offenders,
as well as two types of people whom are
extremely unlikely to sexually harm children.
Click, open in new tab or window, and download,
to view in full resolution
5. Dismantling Myth #4: The False Idea That All Child Molesters Have Hundreds of Victims
In fact, I have said all of
the above, in order to caution my readers that anybody could be a
pedophile, or a child molester, because what most people think they know about the profile of child molesters, is based on unfounded rumors.
It is commonly thought that all or
most people who perpetrate sex crimes against children, do all of the following:
1) are exclusively, rather than primarily or even just somewhat, sexually
attracted to children; and 2) will definitely offend; 3) will offend
repeatedly or serially; and as such, 4) have dozens and dozens of
victims already.
This may sound like a farfetched
claim, but this is, unfortunately, the stereotype about child molesters
and child rapists, which has been allowed to propagate through American society.
This is partially owing to the widely-repeated, and unfounded, claim, that
every child molester has molested hundreds of children. It is also owing to the stereotype that every child molester is a serial child molester.
This rumor has suffered from the “telephone
game”; it was actually based on a real statistic; that the average
serial child molester may have as many as four hundred
victims in his or her lifetime. That is very different from saying that every person who has touched a child inappropriately, has four hundred victims.
Again, I say this not to diminish
the seriousness of the crimes of child molestation and rape. I say this to make
it clear that just because the average serial child rapist might
have four hundred victims in his lifetime, that is no guarantee that
your husband will not molest your son or daughter once or twice in his entire
lifetime.
It is important to keep in mind that it is possible for a person to be a serial child molester or rapist, while only having one victim. A person who repeatedly victimizes the same child, is a "serial" child molester or rapist, every bit as much as someone who targets multiple children.
It is important to keep in mind because sometimes a child is molested or raped by its own parent multiple times and nobody sees it. When that happens, it will often be difficult for people to believe it. They might say, "That's ridiculous, your parent loves you, and besides, everybody knows that child molesters are (fill in the blank)."
Fill in the blank with "all fat and lonely and don't have families", or with "all criminals who are constantly on the run", or "all have multiple victims, so it would be easy to tell, because someone would have come forward by now."
A study called "Psychological Profile of Pedophiles and Child Molesters" by John B. Murray, explains common (but not all-pervasive) profile characteristic of pedophiles and child molesters. The abstract of that study reads as follows:
"Pedophiles and child molesters share some characteristics. Most are male, and they can be heterosexual, homosexual, or bisexual. Some prefer adult sex partners but choose children because they are available and vulnerable. The sexual abuse perpetrated may be a 1-time incident and may consist only of fondling. Penetration is unlikely with young children. Perpetrators' ages range from teens to midlife. Most victims are girls, and the perpetrator usually is a relative, friend, or neighbor. The home of the victim is often the setting for the incident. When boys are victims, sexual abuse may take place outside the home, and perpetrators may be strangers. Perpetrators of sexual abuse of children often claim they they themselves were victims of childhood sexual abuse."
It is important to keep in mind that it is possible for a person to be a serial child molester or rapist, while only having one victim. A person who repeatedly victimizes the same child, is a "serial" child molester or rapist, every bit as much as someone who targets multiple children.
It is important to keep in mind because sometimes a child is molested or raped by its own parent multiple times and nobody sees it. When that happens, it will often be difficult for people to believe it. They might say, "That's ridiculous, your parent loves you, and besides, everybody knows that child molesters are (fill in the blank)."
Fill in the blank with "all fat and lonely and don't have families", or with "all criminals who are constantly on the run", or "all have multiple victims, so it would be easy to tell, because someone would have come forward by now."
A study called "Psychological Profile of Pedophiles and Child Molesters" by John B. Murray, explains common (but not all-pervasive) profile characteristic of pedophiles and child molesters. The abstract of that study reads as follows:
"Pedophiles and child molesters share some characteristics. Most are male, and they can be heterosexual, homosexual, or bisexual. Some prefer adult sex partners but choose children because they are available and vulnerable. The sexual abuse perpetrated may be a 1-time incident and may consist only of fondling. Penetration is unlikely with young children. Perpetrators' ages range from teens to midlife. Most victims are girls, and the perpetrator usually is a relative, friend, or neighbor. The home of the victim is often the setting for the incident. When boys are victims, sexual abuse may take place outside the home, and perpetrators may be strangers. Perpetrators of sexual abuse of children often claim they they themselves were victims of childhood sexual abuse."
The abstract continues (I advise the reader to focus on this sentence):
"Psychological profiles are helpful but are compromised partly because many perpetrators are prisoners and control groups are lacking for this research."
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00223980009600863?journalCode=vjrl20
The fact that psychological profiles of child molesters are "compromised partly" should prompt us to use logic - and ask ourselves if we can think of examples of exceptions to the rules we thought we knew - to reconsider what information needs to be added, to the accurate information regarding child sex offender profiles, to complete our knowledge about this topic.
That is why I have written this article.
"Psychological profiles are helpful but are compromised partly because many perpetrators are prisoners and control groups are lacking for this research."
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00223980009600863?journalCode=vjrl20
The fact that psychological profiles of child molesters are "compromised partly" should prompt us to use logic - and ask ourselves if we can think of examples of exceptions to the rules we thought we knew - to reconsider what information needs to be added, to the accurate information regarding child sex offender profiles, to complete our knowledge about this topic.
That is why I have written this article.
6. Dismantling Myth #5: The False Idea That All Child Molesters Inflict Grievous Harm or Visible Injuries
Knowing that not every person who molests a child is a serial child rapist with hundreds of victims, we should also keep in mind that not every act of child molestation or child rape will always leave life-threatening injuries, or even visible scars.
Oprah Winfrey has discussed, in multiple episodes of her television show, that some children who have been molested, will not even know that they have been molested. This, according to Oprah, is because the abuse was not physically painful. Some child molesters - but not rapists - abuse children by tricking them into focusing on any physical or sexual pleasure which the child might derive from the act.
This is not to say that molestation can be good for a child; it is simply to acknowledge that some child molesters intentionally include some pleasurable touching when they molest children. They do this: 1) to confuse the child about whether they like the touching; and/or 2) because rape is (almost always) about both violence and sexual attraction.
To say that child molesters sometimes get away with their crimes by gently restraining the child, and then molesting them without severely injuring them or raping or penetrating them. This could potentially cause the child to remember more pleasure than pain being involved in the event. And that is, of course, the outcome which the child molester would desire, because a molested child who can't remember an incident being more painful than pleasing, is unlikely to come forward to report the way they remember the event.
Parents should keep in mind that wounds, lacerations, blood in the stool, bruises, and other forms of easily visible injuries, will not always appear on a child who has been molested.
Blood in the stool likely indicates anal rape, as does anal fissure. Torn labia, and blood, indicates vaginal rape.
But a boy who has been forcefully restrained, and masturbated against his will, is likely to have no more than a visible bruise or two, if even that. It is certainly possible to molest a child without leaving a mark. It is probably not possible to rape a child without causing injuries and leaving evidence, but it is certainly possible to molest a child and leave them unscathed, except for the obvious emotional and psychological trauma, and physical stress, which result from being forcibly restrained and molested.
I would name some examples of ways to molest a child without leaving a mark, but I don't want to give anyone - child molester or not - any wrong ideas. So it's best to just end here.
Parents should keep in mind that wounds, lacerations, blood in the stool, bruises, and other forms of easily visible injuries, will not always appear on a child who has been molested.
Blood in the stool likely indicates anal rape, as does anal fissure. Torn labia, and blood, indicates vaginal rape.
But a boy who has been forcefully restrained, and masturbated against his will, is likely to have no more than a visible bruise or two, if even that. It is certainly possible to molest a child without leaving a mark. It is probably not possible to rape a child without causing injuries and leaving evidence, but it is certainly possible to molest a child and leave them unscathed, except for the obvious emotional and psychological trauma, and physical stress, which result from being forcibly restrained and molested.
I would name some examples of ways to molest a child without leaving a mark, but I don't want to give anyone - child molester or not - any wrong ideas. So it's best to just end here.
7. Conclusion
If we go on thinking that these unfounded
rumors and stereotypes about what sort of person is likely to molest our
children, are true, then we risk thinking that, if our child gets molested, then
it could only have been by someone who is a crazy, psychopathic, serial child
rapist, who has many, many other victims already.
No child-molesting husbands or wives
are going to get caught, if we go on giving parental molesters of children a
sort of “qualified immunity”; believing that the fact that the child is being
taken care of, means that they couldn’t have been molested. [Note: Some courts will give parents who sexually abuse their children "slaps on the wrist", such as by making them take a class, or read a pamphlet, about how molesting children is bad.]
And moreover, nobody will get caught, if we go on believing that children couldn’t have been molested by anyone for whom the police aren’t already searching.
None of these stereotypes help detect child molesters, either before or after they offend. They only help people remain in denial about what's going on in their own families.
Lastly - and this point probably deserves its own section - a child is more likely to be molested, raped, and/or kidnapped, by someone they know (like a family member, neighbor, or teacher) than someone they don't know (like a criminal from off the street).
Learn the warning signs of child sexual abuse and neglect.
Is the child particularly afraid of one parent, or a specific adult? Does the child seem to want to talk about nothing but their own safety, or about how they're being mistreated by someone? Does the child know too much about sex at a young age? Has the child sexually abused or tortured other children or animals? Does the child have dark circles under its eyes? Does the child seem distant, lonely, or scared most of the time? Does the child have few friends, or few close friends? Does the child seem to have a hard time trusting certain people, or people in general?
If this describes a child you know, then that child might be suffering from neglect, abuse, or even sexual assault.
If the child has reported an injury related to sexual abuse, document that injury, visit a doctor, and get a rape test (if necessary) as soon as possible. Document everything you can regarding the abuse, and make sure to save anything and everything (clothes, furniture, other items) that might have the abuser's DNA on them.
Child sexual abuse and assault are sensitive subjects. For years, courts have shied away from prosecuting priests accused with such crimes, based on the notion that the trial would traumatize the victim, and make them re-live the traumatic experience (even though one cannot say that without accidentally admitting that the first traumatic experience happened to begin with).
Many courts simply don't want to get involved in child molestation cases. It's almost as if the courts see these criminal cases as "intra-family disputes" in which the state should not interfere.
It is difficult to find trustworthy therapists, police officers, and social workers, who are not either abusers themselves, or else have come to see child abuse as an inevitable fact of life, which pays their bills, giving them no incentive to do anything but pass victims off to other therapists, police officers, and social workers.
And moreover, nobody will get caught, if we go on believing that children couldn’t have been molested by anyone for whom the police aren’t already searching.
None of these stereotypes help detect child molesters, either before or after they offend. They only help people remain in denial about what's going on in their own families.
Lastly - and this point probably deserves its own section - a child is more likely to be molested, raped, and/or kidnapped, by someone they know (like a family member, neighbor, or teacher) than someone they don't know (like a criminal from off the street).
Learn the warning signs of child sexual abuse and neglect.
Is the child particularly afraid of one parent, or a specific adult? Does the child seem to want to talk about nothing but their own safety, or about how they're being mistreated by someone? Does the child know too much about sex at a young age? Has the child sexually abused or tortured other children or animals? Does the child have dark circles under its eyes? Does the child seem distant, lonely, or scared most of the time? Does the child have few friends, or few close friends? Does the child seem to have a hard time trusting certain people, or people in general?
If this describes a child you know, then that child might be suffering from neglect, abuse, or even sexual assault.
If the child has reported an injury related to sexual abuse, document that injury, visit a doctor, and get a rape test (if necessary) as soon as possible. Document everything you can regarding the abuse, and make sure to save anything and everything (clothes, furniture, other items) that might have the abuser's DNA on them.
Child sexual abuse and assault are sensitive subjects. For years, courts have shied away from prosecuting priests accused with such crimes, based on the notion that the trial would traumatize the victim, and make them re-live the traumatic experience (even though one cannot say that without accidentally admitting that the first traumatic experience happened to begin with).
Many courts simply don't want to get involved in child molestation cases. It's almost as if the courts see these criminal cases as "intra-family disputes" in which the state should not interfere.
It is difficult to find trustworthy therapists, police officers, and social workers, who are not either abusers themselves, or else have come to see child abuse as an inevitable fact of life, which pays their bills, giving them no incentive to do anything but pass victims off to other therapists, police officers, and social workers.
Before deciding whether to come forward, learn about whether there have been more complaints, in your state, about children suffering abuse at the hands of either the police or the child protective services agency or agencies in the state.
Written and Published on May 8th, 2021
Edited and Expanded on May 12th, 16th, and 17th, 2021
Images Added on May 17th, 2021
Originally published under the title
"Not All Child Molesters Are Exclusively Attracted to Children"
Title changed to
"Dismantling Five Stereotypes About Child Molesters That Are
Helping Them Evade Notice, Capture, and Judgment"
Originally published under the title
"Not All Child Molesters Are Exclusively Attracted to Children"
Title changed to
"Dismantling Five Stereotypes About Child Molesters That Are
Helping Them Evade Notice, Capture, and Judgment"
on May 12th, 2021
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
-
To see the above image in greater detail and expand it, click on it, and open it in a new tab or window. To see a higher-q... -
Click, and/or open in new tab or window, to enlarge Image created in September 2019 Originally Published on September 23rd, 20... -
Texas Congressman Ron Paul and consumer advocate Ralph Nader Social Libertarianism is the answer to Fascism. Whereas Fascism em...