The ambiguity surrounding paedophilia: Who is and who isn’t a paedophile?

Both social and scientific studies of paedophilia over the past 60 years have demonstrated that what constitutes ‘the paedophile’ has been shrouded in ambiguity. Historically, scientists and psychologists alike have continuously chopped and changed the definition of precisely what defines a paedophile. These days the mass media has a strong say in what a paedophile is – indeed – much of the general public’s social constructs of what defines a paedophile is made up through what they see and hear in the media. But thanks to scientists, psychological reports and in part the media, we are now beginning to discover what a paedophile is and who these paedophiles are likely to be.

Speaking in hindsight it is clear that defining paedophilia has been a struggle for criminologists, scientists and psychologists. In 1953 the American psychological Association [APA] defined paedophilia as a sexual deviation and sociopathic condition, in 1968 the definition was changed to a sexual deviation and non psychotic medical disorder, in 1980 it was defined as people who were only interested in sexual acts with pre-pubescent children, and in 1987 the definition went on to include adults who were interested in pre-pubescent children as well as other adults. Clearly the APA definition of paedophilia has evolved over a substantial time period and is obscure to say the least.

At the start of the new millennium the ‘Diagnostic and Statistic Manual of Mental Dissorders’ made what defines a paedophile even more puzzling. They described paedophilia as a sexual paraphilia stating that the defender has to be at least 16 years old, at least five years older than the victim – the victim is not older than 12 or 13 years and the defender has to have serious urges/fantasies that are causing them distress or that they have acted upon. Constant adaptions and conflicting definitions of paedophilia has led to unquestionable ambiguity surrounding whether a person is a paedohpile or not. Furthermore, it has also meant a lack of reliability for the aforementioned institutions researching paedophilia.

In 2007 the World Health Organisation described paedophilia as “a sexual preference for children, boys or girls or both usually of pre-pubertal or early-pubertal age.” Clearly the question of what paedophilia acutely consists of has baffled researchers for generations. However, the Sexual Offences Act has looked to address this issue, for a person to be a paedophile the act states: “A sexual relationship between an adult (over 18) and a child (under 16).” The Sexual Offences Act also describes a newly proposed diagnostic classification – a hebephile.  A hebophile is described as a person who gains sexual gratification from contact with children aged 14-17. By law a hebophile is not strictly a paedophile but falls into what the public, government and the media seem to regard paedophilia as – again it is confusing.

Chris Jeffries was wrongly named as a paedophile and child killer and successfully sued several media organisations

It probably would not surprise anyone for us to state that generally the media dictate to us what type of person is and is not a paedohphile. Historically speaking paedophiles are middle aged/older men, below average looking and single. However, the social construct of who paedophiles are has changed profoundly in recent years. Thanks to research and the media it is now common knowledge that paedophiles can come from any walk of life – they can be adults who are old, young, rich, poor men or women. Over the past five years VIP members of the establishment have come under the spotlight of paedophile accusations – from MPs and celebrities to members of the royal family. Although this does not stop the media labeling the stereotypical ‘strange looking man’ as the paedophile e.g. Chris Jeffries. Clearly paedophile research has progressed in the last 50 or so years but is a person born a paedophile or do circumstances in their lives dictate it?

Whether it all boils down to science that is the question, recent scientific reports suggest that a paedophiles sexual attraction to pre-pubescent children may well be a biological condition in the brain. Further suggesting that paedophiles are born with the condition and it is almost certainly untreatable. In light of recent revelations which link paedophilia to the brain and natural biology, it stirs controversial debates as to how these individuals should be treated in society, particularly in the remit of law.

It goes without saying that such crimes against children are heinous. The question some have proposed is whether paedophiles should be subjected to harsher criminal punishment and more stringent restrictions but if research dictates that they are born with the condition and there seems to be no universal cure on the horizon is this really the way forward? Clearly the main aim of laws against paedophiles is the safety of the public and the strong safeguarding of children, the parental need to protect children from sexual predators.

Some circles propose that the legal system should veer away from the narrow approach of stigmatisation which deals with paedophiles after the crimes have been committed. Perhaps the law should concentrate more on making sure the paedophiles are prevented from offending in the first place and when they are caught then treatment procedures should be initiated, as they say often prevention is the best cure.

Nature or nurture?

The idea that paedophilia is a condition in the brain has resurfaced in our generation. There is research coming out of Canada at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health in Toronto which was recently visited by BBC reporters in their documentary about paedophiles. Research at the centre is led by Dr. James Cantor, who has been studying paedophilia and its association with the brain for more than 10 years. This new research indicates that paedophiles are biologically wired to be sexually attracted to children. The average IQ of the paedophiles in the group was 90, which Dr. Cantor describes as not noticeable on the street but enough that one might think the person was not very bright. His research further suggests a developmental difference exists in paedophiles before offences are committed.

The DSM-IV-TR – a diagnostic and statistical manual is used to create consistency in terminology and diagnoses of mental disorders. Paedophilia is classified within the category of mental disorders known as paraphilias, which are “recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviours” that fall outside what one might consider societal norms. Paedophilia is sexual activity with a prepubescent child, generally aged thirteen or younger. Whereas a child sexual abuser is an individual who is attracted to, or engages in, sexual activity with a teenager underage who has undergone puberty, generally aged fourteen to eighteen, these distinctions are important.

It is believed that on average, paedophiles are approximately 2.5 centimetres shorter than the rest of the population. As for handedness, about ten percent of the regular population is left-handed, while in contrast about thirty percent of paedophiles are left-handed. The dominant hemisphere of the brain determines handedness. Paedophiles rarely seek help voluntarily, normally only coming in contact with mental health or medical professionals after they have committed a crime and enter the criminal justice system.

There are clear conclusions that can be drawn right now from the nature arguments, which can and should have legal implications. First, accepting the science as it stands; people are born with the condition of paedophilia. Furthermore, there is no cure. As of now, the condition in the brain cannot be changed.

It is increasingly becoming the case whereby victims are not ashamed of what happened to them and they don’t want others to ignore their abuse or be afraid to speak out. They speak out to prevent others from remaining silent that is more often the case. The renowned pianist James Rhodes revealed yesterday that he was repeatedly raped as a child and it took him 25 years to break his silence. He spoke of the toxic manipulation used by paedophiles to keep their victims from speaking out. They often threaten with ‘unimaginably bad things’ if their victims speak out. Charities have insisted that child sex abuse is the underlying cause for some addiction, self-harm, various disorders and even mental health problems. Victims often experience suicidal thoughts.

Only a relatively small number of abuse cases come to the attention of the authorities, but the report by the Children’s Commissioner for England Anne Longfield, is a comprehensive attempt to measure and understand abuse that is hidden from view. The report also highlighted that up to 70% of child sex abuse takes place within the family, 85% of said abuse goes unreported. The key issue here is what happens when the abuse is reported; many times victims are not believed, it is important to take that burden away from the children. The report also suggested that there might be as many as 450,000 cases of abuse which is far greater than the reported 50,000 recorded from April 2012 to March 2014. It’s conclusion that only one child in every eight facing sexual abuse comes to the attention of the authorities makes shocking reading. The statistics reveal how the crime is rampant across the country. According to a recent investigation there could be a quarter of a million paedophiles in the UK. Conviction rates are low despite the fact that technological advancement aids police investigations into these crimes.

How about when the abuser is a young woman? This question is rarely addressed. In the past two years, an increasing number of female teachers, tutors and teaching assistants have come before the courts accused of attempting to seduce and, in some cases, succeeding in seducing boys in their care. We have heard about female teaching assistants spared jail time despite admitting engaging in sexual activities and in some cases affairs with young under-age students. The shocking case of Marie Black springs to mind. Marie, 34, was found guilty of orchestrating a paedophile ring and she sexually abused children.

Some critics of the current legal system insist that if an offender is found to be “untreatable,” he should be sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole. While being admitted to a mental institution is substantially more expensive than imprisonment, some consider this a better alternative as it can address the issue rather than simply punish the crime. However it has been suggested that this method is not a sufficient enough format to adopt as there is no guarantee of child safety.

The social stigma for paedophiles starts with sentencing. While a paedophile who engages in sexual acts with children commits a serious crime, the paedophile is often treated more harshly than others who have committed similar crimes with adults. Many would argue that the effect of the abuse on the child is long lasting and more serious when the victim is a child therefore imposing a harsher treatment is understandable, but the science suggesting paedophilia is a biological ‘cross-wiring’ should force the lawmakers to reconsider. Such arguments stoke up the moral and ethical sides of the topic.

The internet is a breeding ground for child abusers

In the US that law states that, possessing child pornography carries a minimum five year prison sentence. The paedophile faces more time in prison than other sex offenders, and other criminals in general; because of a condition that science now indicates he was born with. Of course, the social stigma is compounded when the paedophile has served his criminal sentence. After the paedophile is released from prison, they are often forced to return to prison under ‘civil commitment statutes’ and must also comply with registration and notification statutes. Paedophiles, it seems are the most vulnerable of child abusers under these civil commitment and registration and notification statutes. Paedophiles in the US go through some of the most stringent of registration and notification requirements or they are thrown back to jail. They are always at risk of repeat offending; so it is easy to see the argument proposed in favour of life without parole. The notorious murderer and paedophile Mark Bridger was jailed for life, a welcomed outcome for all following the case. Post-trial I was forced to consider whether more preventative measures should be in place which will protect children. There should be more support services available to those abused but also interestingly, some suggested the same should be extended to the abusers. Online chat rooms and the dark web have long produced paedophile rings and networks, it is important to strengthen laws that will sap the appeal for suspected and potential child abusers. Although STOP IT NOW is available for potential abusers, it is not a strong enough deterrent but the argument has long-term benefits of protecting children because of the practical advice and therapy administered to the abusers.

April Jones killer Mark Bridger

Clearly the ambiguity surrounding paedophiles and paedophilia is intense. The general public’s feelings toward paedophiles and people suspected of being paedohpiles are hatred and rightly so. But if research is correct and paedophiles are ‘wired’ in the brains as paedohpiles when they are born then throwing them in jail for several years and then releasing them is not going to improve the situation. Rehabilitation is necessary. The act of paedophilia has existed within human life forever – it is not something that is going to be eradicated. Therefore more help and support is crucial for victims of paedophiles and allegations need to be taken much more seriously.  Whether we want to beleive it or not paedophiles are in every section of our modern society and unless the issue of support for the victims and rehabilitation for the criminals is addressed then things are going to go from bad to worse.

 

 

The Dark Side of the Internet: Exposed

You can now view this article on our brand new website: http://politicsbulletin.co.uk/london-mayoral-election-2016-candidate-rosalind-readhead/

Enter the shadowy part of the web where the Ashley Madison hackers released all…

In this modern era the internet is a common staple in people’s lives. In 2015 the internet can be used for almost anything, from grocery shopping to learning about nuclear physics, however, what a lot of people do not know is that there’s a darker and deeper side of the internet, namely the dark web.

Dark Web dictionary definition:

1. The Dark Web, often confusingly referred to as the Deep Web or the Darknet is the World Wide Web content that exists on darknet, networks which overlay the public Internet and require specific software, configurations or authorization to access.
2. The Dark Web is a term that refers specifically to a collection of websites that are publicly visible, but hide the IP addresses of the servers that run them. Thus they can be visited by any web user, but it is very difficult to work out who is behind the sites. And you cannot find these sites using search engines.

It is stated that the internet can be likened to an iceberg; the tip of the iceberg is everything you can see and browse using the surface web but the vast majority of internet information and data is located ‘below the water’ on the deep or dark web.

The difference between the surface web and the deep web

In order to access the dark web users need to use what is called an onion browser. Through a series of encryption techniques an onion browser allows the user to hide his/her IP address which keeps them anonymous. The Tor onion browser, which was first created by the U.S. navy, was used during the Arab Spring by a variety of Arab journalists and activists, the anonymous protocol meant that the ruling government dictatorships were not able to stop activists because they did not know who they were.  Although the term anonymous sounds eerie and secretive, onion browsers are used because it ensures that users internet browsing is private, search engines such as Google Chrome, Internet Explorer and Firefox are able to track users browsing habits. Many theorists have suggested that there is absolutely no privacy on the surface web and most claim that what internet browsers and search engines such as Google do is an invasion of privacy, which is difficult to deny.

The NSA sees all and hears all

Each and every day when we access the internet, our browsing history and data is sold by the likes of Google to advertisers for the highest price, ever wondered why 10 minutes after you’ve been searching for an Xbox an advertisement offering the best prices on Xbox’s pops up via Facebook? Well now you know.

Furthermore, the revelations revealed by whistle blower Edward Snowden established how governments were also snooping in on the behaviour of their citizens. The American Nation Security Agency (NSA) and Britain’s Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) tracked and kept files on all of their citizens internet browsing data, they also tapped into the private phone calls of citizens as well as the phone calls of the President of France and the Chancellor of Germany. In addition, before the Snowden files were revealed the head of the NSA, James Clapper, lied under oath when he answered no to the question ‘does the NSA collect any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of US citizens?’ In a functioning democracy it is essential that every citizen has the right to privacy, however, privacy is simply not feasible on the surface web and this is the reason we have the dark web and browsers which allow internet users to remain hidden. For the record, the only way Edward Snowden was able to tell the world about the shady practices of many western governments was by using encryption methods to contact journalists anonymously. Journalists, whistle blowers and any member of the public can encrypt their emails so that it makes it extremely difficult and often impossible for governments to read the information inside.

Online privacy, does it matter to you?

Good sides of the dark web

Whistle blower Edward Snowden was the key to the public finding out about government snooping

As aforementioned, the dark web is accessed by journalists, whistle blowers and activists in order for them to remain anonymous when discussing cases involving government cover ups etc. In an age where almost everything is done via a computer it is fundamentally important to democracy and society that privacy still exists. The notion that ‘if you’ve got nothing to hide then you’ve got nothing to fear’ is irrelevant as the right to privacy is a basic human right, even if you do not wish to fulfill that right it doesn’t mean you should be able to prohibit somebody else from using that same basic human right. Giving the power of your own privacy to someone else should be an extremely worrying thought regardless of the intentions of the person, company or government seeking to gain access to your privacy.

Alan Pearce, a journalist and author who specializes in the deep web said: “Journalism has been transformed by the Internet and the Internet has opened journalists to levels of surveillance that would have horrified George Orwell. Intelligence agencies and law enforcement want access to your notes, contacts and sources. They watch everything you do online. They know who you talk to, where you go and what you read. They can even predict your future movements. And they want to know about your next story long before you type the last full-stop. Journalists are prime targets in cyber-space – the emerging battleground – targets in the sights of “democratic” governments and not just those of the repressive regimes.

WikiLeaks are another organisation that regularly use the deep web and the anonymity it produces in order to share and discuss information with their sources in private. WikiLeaks were able to leak footage which displayed American soldiers in Iraq seemingly murder innocent civilians in cold blood and bragging about it to each other. Two Reuters journalists were later found to be among the dead. Footage like this would not have been released to the public if it wasn’t for the dark web and the browsers which make it possible for users to be anonymous.

Bad sides of the dark web

Whilst anonymity helps protect whistle blowers and encourages journalists to shine lights onto dark places it also creates criminal behavior. Littered throughout the dark web are thousands upon thousands of websites that show the deplorable depths that the human civilization has ventured into. Child porn, gore, snuff films, torture flicks, live murder and rape films and other deeply unpleasant kinds of socially unacceptable ‘entertainment’ are regularly watched and enjoyed by users on the deep web. Hackers patrol the deep web like bull dogs waiting for unsuspecting victims with low level computer security to walk into their lair. Hackers on the deep web possess the ability to hack into your computer, control your webcam, steal all your details and make your life a living hell. It is possible to access information on how to make bombs whilst there are also black markets selling illegal drugs and guns. People who visit these websites without going to prison employ certain precautions to avoid being tracked, they essentially build a barrier of protection around their internet identity. Furthermore, the cryptocurrency known as Bitcoin is used which does not offer a ‘money trail’ like using a credit card would.  Anonymity deems it near impossible to track down the people who access this type of material for their viewing pleasure and although law enforcement do attempt to shut down these malevolent websites, websites on the deep web have been likened to the hydra; if you cut one of the heads off, three immediately grow back.

The Silk Road homepage before it was shut down by the FBI

For example, the U.S. government successfully managed to shutdown Silk Road. Silk Road was known as the eBay of the dark web, it was a place where users could anonymously buy and sell illegal items such as class A drugs and weapons from pistols to AK47 machine guns. Silk Road made over $1 billion between February of 2011 and July of 2013. Through a series of detective work (it has been claimed that the FBI had under cover detectives acting as drug king pins) the FBI managed to successfully shut down Silk Road and arrest the man deemed to be the creator of the website, Ross Ulbricht. Although many unanswered questions have been left such as why didn’t the FBI go after child porn websites or sites where innocent victims are filmed being tortured and killed which progresses into the film being sold to the highest bidder. It is paramount that other black markets have simply taken the place of Silk Road. Furthermore, there are serious questions as to why Ulbricht has been given life imprisonment but we will not go into them at this time.

Ross Ulbricht

Many places on the dark web are deeply disturbing, many of the sites on there are easily vile enough to make one physically sick and question humanity, however, the internet is just a reflection of society, crime exists and it always will exist. Yes, onion browsers, due to their anonymity, hide criminals but unfortunately there will always be criminal behaviour in human society. The dark web is used to protect against mass surveillance, it is an impossible task to control the deep web, encryption and privacy is the only way to protect our communications in this modern age of technology.