From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This Crime related article has not received a brainstar for quality. Please consider expanding the article appropriately. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.


Archives for this talk page: , (new)


Is it me or is kind of disturbing to see the Rainbow flag right at the side of the title of this article? I know is because of the subject matter is sexuality but it truly can be missinterpreted. --TV Guy (talk) 01:16, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

The sexuality navbar is there because pedophilia is a sexual attraction. It's the same reason why necrophilia has the sexuality navbar.—Hamburguesa con queso con un cara Spinning-Burger.gif (talkstalk) 07:07, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
But there's a navbar for crime, shouldn't be better to have both? --TV Guy (talk) 15:21, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
Pedophilia is not a crime. Rape, assault, molestation: these are crimes. Anyone can be guilty or innocent of them, regardless of their sexual preference. It is rather bigoted to suggest that someone is a criminal by virtue of their sexuality. Mean mr. custard (talk) 23:08, 13 January 2018 (UTC) @TV Guy

A far more realistic approach to the issue[edit]

"Public Opinion" section[edit]

I was wondering if there's a more recent survey than 2014 already available? Percentages can change in 6 years. Thunderclapper (talk) 11:02, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Problems with this article[edit]

Looking back at this article, I still think this article is still pretty flawed.

One issue I have is how the article tries to define pedophilia. The thing is that the "technical medical" definition is not restricted to medical contexts, but also used in other contexts including in discourse around fighting child sexual abuse and trafficking (examples: The Mama Bear Effect ECPAT, the Quebec government). I realize we ought to call out and condemn who try to play semantics to try and justify their jailbait and raping the underage (ex. the "it's ephebophilia not pedophilia" hack), but I don't think trying to force this article's "common term" definition is the correct way of doing so; furthermore even that fails to capture the fuzziness on how the term is commonly used. Many use it to refer to the act of child molestation itself, and also apply the term to people who aren't yet adults (ex. Sara Palin calling Lena Dunham a "pedophile" for what she did when she was like 7).

Another thing is that a lot of the article is messy and contains a lot of unnecessary information. For example, I don't think the "Cultural influences" section as being relevant to the article or pedophilia as a condition. A lot of the "Online" section was copied from the Online pedophile activism article and much of the stuff here would be more appropriate there. And the "Semantics" section is rather messily written, though this is obviously easily fixed.

Although most of the content is good, I think this article is still in need of a major rewrite or reformatting.Advicedoge (talk) 07:59, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

Add this to the page[edit]

Pedophiles are useless eaters. — Unsigned, by: Wildcat Fan / talk / contribs