Most offenders I’ve interacted with have no specific attraction to children at all. They want to rape someone and children just happen to make ideal victims by being smaller and weaker and depending on age and upbringing may not even realize a crime had occurred or be able to advocate for themselves. Most of the offenders would have / often had also raped the elderly or disabled if given the chance. They would even attempt to prey on the smaller or weaker staff members or other patients if given the opportunity.

There were a few edge cases of profoundly psychotic / ID patients who genuinely just didn’t know any better but again it was rarely a specific attraction and more of an overall disinhibition, they would generally also have trespassing, petty theft, and property damage charges and were showing their genitals to just about anyone. Violent and sexual intrusive thoughts can be a part of some OCD presentations but the thoughts usually go away when the underlying anxiety is treated with medication and behavioral therapy. Pts with violent and sexual intrusive thoughts also pretty much never offend, to the extent that I never really interacted with that population until after leaving forensics. They’re a super high suicide risk though due to not understanding the actual psychological mechanism of the thoughts (self-reinforcing through anxiety, not attraction).

I’m not saying attraction to children doesn’t exist, but when we’re taking about the actual issue of child sexual assault it’s just an unproductive line of discussion that relates very little to the actual core issues. The “can’t help being attracted” is mostly pop-psychology TV shows use to tell a more emotionally charged story.

Now that said, we do have a huge issue as a society with allowing the high of righteous fury to interfere with victims actually receiving justice. Those accused have just as much of a right to due process as anyone accused of any other crime. Interfering with that right either creates massive overreach by the legal system or in individual cases damages evidence that would be used to fairly prosecute an offender. It also creates a social environment where people protect their offending loved ones out of fear for them, when they should feel secure in the knowledge that while they will probably always love the offender, they can and will be safely separated from the rest of society (or at least be forced to live under monitoring and away from possible victims) for the rest of their natural life.

And you are questioning multiple downvotes while making comments like this. Maybe its because you have shit takes

I think the point is that she was a child rapist, not necessarily a pedophile.

Some child rapists rape children because of the power imbalance etc., not necessarily out of physical, sexual, or romantic attraction.

Pretty crazy take to voice in a thread about a child-raping teacher…no? Whether a person is sexually attracted to children or not, they should not rape them, and especially not if they are in a profession with in loco parentis legal responsibility?

deleted by creator

We have a word for that, it’s pedophile. That acronym shit is literally pro pedophile propaganda attempting to normalize it as acceptable.