Disclaimer: like most pedophiles, I have never approached a child with anything sexual or otherwise inapporpriate, and I don’t plan ever to do so. I recognize the harm in such actions, and I don’t want to hurt the very people I love. If you expect AMA with a child molester, this ain’t it.
The account is a throwaway, hope you’ll understand this decision given the sensitivity of the topic.
Edit: Thank you for keeping civil and genuine in your questions. I did envision hostility, yet here you are, amazing as always. Lemmy is a wonderful place to be, thanks to you all!
Edit 2: Apparently we have another brave pedophile here in the comments, and he came with a good note I should include in the post: if you find yourself attracted to minors, that’s okay. Acting on your desires is dangerous, but having them isn’t. If you’d like to have some support and/or community that would help you get your bearings or just listen without any prejudice (we’re all in the same boat), there are places that can help you. removed
I should’ve rephrased the first question. On Epstein, I was more about the difference of calling a person attracted to minors a pedophile\ephebophile and those who did abused a minor even if they weren’t psychologically attracted. My own assumption is that for these rich people it was both a taboo thing they can afford and also a way to get a compromat on each other to sign their loyalty to each other. Should media and public assume they were attracted by default, or we should use abuser\molester before some psychological examination?
Thanks for taking your time. Interesting perspective, completely foreign to me.
Ah. Well, as I said, merely abusing a child doesn’t constitute an attraction, you’re right on that. There is plenty of non-pedophilic child abusers (in fact, those constitute about half of all cases for sexual abuse of minors), just as there’s plenty of pedophiles who never touched a child.
Constituting an attraction is therefore a separate task involving complicated equipment and testing methods.