The Creepy Pedophile

Most people tend to be of the opinion that a pedophile is creepy just by virtue of being a pedophile. It is his sexual interest in children that makes him creepy. But when it comes to defining what sort of behavior counts as being "creepy", we the enlightened pedophiles are in a position to make a distinction between behavior that represents pedophilia in a non-"creepy" way, and behavior that is legitimately creepy.

For instance, loving a child in a way that requires placing the child's welfare and happiness above one's own, is a behavior related to pedophilia that can only be described as "creepy" on loaded and discriminatory terms. On the other hand, tricking children into vulnerable positions so they can be taken advantage of against their will is creepy behavior regardless of whether or not it can be attributed to pedophilia.

The problem is that many people have come to associate the creepy behavior with pedophilia. They think the only way a pedophile can act towards a child is creepily, and if it doesn't look overtly creepy, that's just because the real creepiness is hiding just under the surface (e.g., the pedophile is only treating the child well to get into his/her pants).

The reality, however, is that many pedophiles behave admirably towards children, in exclusively non-creepy ways. Other pedophiles behave in ways that are characterized as creepy when they really shouldn't be (personally, I don't think sexual desire is creepy). Certainly, there are pedophiles who behave in legitimately creepy ways, but this is no reason to treat all pedophiles with the derision that only the worst kinds of pedophiles deserve.

Furthermore, I think it is highly plausible that many creepy pedophiles' behaviors are inspired by the discrimination they are subject to. Because they cannot satisfy their sexual and/or romantic desires in positive and ethical ways, they resort to creepy behavior because they have no other choice. It's easy to condemn them for choosing that path rather than practicing self-restraint, but I think it's worthwhile to consider whether a person acted poorly out of desperation, as opposed to antisocial glee.

Certainly, the two cases should call for different responses. We gain nothing by treating the desperate as if they were sadistic. A sadist would seek to hurt others even if provided a more ethical alternative.* The desperate, however, would gladly put aside their creepy behaviors if they were provided with an alternative method for fulfilling their needs - something that is very much worth considering, for the good of society.

* My apologies to 'consensual sadists'. Assume that when I mention sadism above, I am referring to predatory sadism that involves deliberate nonconsent.

We must also consider the damning effect that demonization and stigmatization has on a person. Consider the desperate pedophile who has been driven against his will (even though his deeds are still fully his responsibility) to behave creepily, and how he will feel when his desperate situation is ignored, and he is treated as scum, as if the love that motivated him, but was twisted by circumstance, were actually hate from the start.

How would that pedophile feel? Would he be inclined to become more or less antisocial? More or less desperate? More or less dangerous to the children he'd prefer to love - if only he were given a chance to? I think these are very important questions to address, if we really care at all about how our children are treated by the ones who love them - whether by right ways or wrong.