Foley, pedophilia, homophobia

[kdpeters]

Somethings about this scandal have really been bothering me and I'd like to discuss it if there's anyone out there willing make a greater than normal effort to follow DU guidelines and extend greater than normal benefit of doubt. I promise to do so myself as these issues are more volatile than most.

Pedophilia: The American Psychiatric Association publishes guidelines to help in diagnosing clinical pedophilia. It states, in part,

The paraphilic focus of Pedophilia involves sexual activity with a prepubescent child (generally age 13 years or younger).

http://www.psychiatryonline.com/content.aspx?aID=10307&searchStr=pedophilia

Pedophilia describes the psychological state of the perpetrator, but the everyday usage tends to imply the psychological impact to the victim without regard to the victim's psychological development as a child or an adolescent. I work in a psychiatric hospital, and like any other psychological institution, we differentiate between children, adolescents, and adults because there are such significant differences that require specialization, often a year or more of further study and practice. Everyday usage doesn't seem to care. In a clinical setting, it's important to understand what you're dealing with because the wrong course of treatment can often be more harmful than no treatment at all. I tend to feel this applies to non-clinical settings as well.

From that angle, I see no good coming from treating Foley as a pedophile and treating his adolescent victims as children. Neither are anywhere close to an accuratet clinical description. But in that view, almost all us liberals join in solidarity with right-wing homophobes in confusing the distinctions with vague, inaccurate language. They hate gays; we hate Republicans. In Foley, we finally agree on the scapegoat while we disagree on the reason why. Is this something to be proud of, to pursue? Are we doing more harm than good applying the wrong course of treatment?

I think so. Thoughts?

[tomreedtoon]

1. Are you talking technological or political terms?

What you say might apply to the process of assisting a person to a cure. Which is a distinction that professionals need to make, but are undue complications in politics.

Also, consider that the psychiatric professional has to deal with the after-effects of abuse. You can only work once the damage has been done. The point of political action is to keep the damage from occurring again, or possibly preventing it.

In a way, it's like an argument between a psychiatrist and a cop over a psychopath holding a pistol. The doctor wants to cure the psycho. The cop wants to stop him from killing again.

[Ayesha]

2. I don't think Foley is a pedophile per se

for pretty much the reasons you gave. Pedophilia is meant to refer to children who are pre-pubescent or early in puberty - though that definition seems to be expanding. What he is for sure is a sexual predator, preying on teens who don't have the maturity level to have sex with an adult. He gets off on power and control over a vulnerable minor, just as pedophiles do. It's a subtle distinction, and both seem equally sick, so if the press wants to call him a pedophile, it doesn't bother me. Either way, he belongs in prison!

[luckyleftyme2]

3. WELL SAID

HE'S A PERVERT! AND SHOULD BE SO NOTED!

[kdpeters]

5. I don't mean to start with Foley, but with a discussion of these issues

What he is for sure is a sexual predator, preying on teens who don't have the maturity level to have sex with an adult.

I wasn't intending to have a discussion about Foley. I was hoping to analyze and discuss what the issues are. These are factors that seem important to examining these issue, yet tend to be off-limits for discussion or clarification.

Try to take Foley out of the picture as if we're discussing some hypothetical situation where we don't know the name, politics, or even the specific work setting in which this hypothetical incident took place? What are the issues you see here? What do you use to determine the severity of the event and the appropriate sanction for it? Are you applying this process consistently when you do know more specific details concerning the identity of the perp?

[kdpeters]

4. Ooops, I also wanted to address what I see as homophobia fueling this

It's seems quite obvious to me that it's homophobia that fuels this scandal. Not ours, there's.

Quick! Name three Congress members involved in a sex scandal while in office. Dem and Repub alike would probably easily come up with Frank, Studds, and Foley. But how many of us on DU know the name Brian Doyle? It should tell you something if you don't recognize it. It got a thread here and on other liberal blogs a few weeks ago, but it got zero traction in the mainstream media. So it slipped off our radar nearly as fast as it appeared while this has been much more prominent across the board for a couple of weeks now. I remember thinking to myself at the time that if he'd targeted a male or been a Democrat, we'd never hear the end of it. The critical mass that makes the difference here comes from homophobes that view all of us gays as pedophiles and predators. To them this is a gay issue. The same or worse behavior directed toward young women isn't nearly so scandalous because it's much more common, and even accepted to a much greater degree.

If we jump on the gay sex scandals and leave this double standard unchallenged, then we accept it. Effectively, it's their prerogative to dictate what we deem important and newsworthy -- which will always be gay sex if at all possible. Read the recent article about Jim Kolbe and you'll know what I mean.