Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
You've convinced me regarding the Egathy case, but I'm skeptical about one thing you say, however.

Only a small portion of sexual abuse of children is committed by paedophiles. Most cases are committed by persons who would prefer adults, but situatively seek sex with children.

That doesn't seem like a credible statement to me. I can understand how some cases of sexual abuse may have occurred because the situation of the abuser prevented normal sexual activity with an adult that he or she would have preferred, but most?

It seems that the venues for such situational limitations in modern society is so small that it could hardly be possible to account for most cases of child sexual abuse. I have a hard time believing people who don't have an identifiable paedophile disposition of at least some degree are involved more than a tiny proportion of the cases.  

Who are we talking about here, for example? People too unattractive to find any adult sexual partners and too poor to employ a sex worker? Nuns living in a structured convent who are teachers or care providers to children too?  Other children?  I can't think of many more possibilities that would be so restrictive on personal sexual possibilities that abusing a child would ever seem like an alternative if one did not already have a proclivity for that.  

by santiago on Wed Feb 26th, 2014 at 06:24:07 PM EST

Others have rated this comment as follows:


Occasional Series