| Revision as of 21:34, 28 July 2015 editFlyer22 Frozen (talk | contribs)365,630 edits ]: Legitimus, I changed it because our Pedophilia article is clear about how the term "pedophilia" is used among the general public, and that the ICD-10 extends the term to "early pubescent." To me, my changes are clearer. More precise.← Previous edit | Revision as of 15:57, 30 July 2015 edit undoZumoarirodoka (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users8,604 edits "Mohammed" is generally considered an archaic translation of MuhammadNext edit → | ||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
| {{hidden end}} | {{hidden end}} | ||
| {{hidden begin | {{hidden begin | ||
| |title = '''Q''': '''Why doesn't this article talk about pedophilia during historical periods of time (e.g. Ancient Greece or Rome, |
|title = '''Q''': '''Why doesn't this article talk about pedophilia during historical periods of time (e.g. Ancient Greece or Rome, Muhammad)?''' | ||
| }} | }} | ||
| :'''A''': Covering this particular sub-topic is highly problematic for several reasons. The term "pedophilia" itself did not exist until the 19th century, and was coined specifically to refer to a mental illness with set criteria. While the condition no doubt existed prior to that, there was no way to categorize or name it, and thus no ] exists labeling any historical person as having "pedophilia." Labeling a historical person based on sexual behavior alone, especially a single recorded perpetration, is also problematic because not all child sexual abusers are pedophiles. The person's internal mental "drive" to engage in such behavior is a key component in diagnosis, something that is almost always missing from historical accounts. A third problem is that the vast majority of such recorded instances in history that people often think of actually would not qualify, because the "child" victim was at or past puberty, whereas pedophilia only refers to prepubescent children. | :'''A''': Covering this particular sub-topic is highly problematic for several reasons. The term "pedophilia" itself did not exist until the 19th century, and was coined specifically to refer to a mental illness with set criteria. While the condition no doubt existed prior to that, there was no way to categorize or name it, and thus no ] exists labeling any historical person as having "pedophilia." Labeling a historical person based on sexual behavior alone, especially a single recorded perpetration, is also problematic because not all child sexual abusers are pedophiles. The person's internal mental "drive" to engage in such behavior is a key component in diagnosis, something that is almost always missing from historical accounts. A third problem is that the vast majority of such recorded instances in history that people often think of actually would not qualify, because the "child" victim was at or past puberty, whereas pedophilia only refers to prepubescent children. | ||
Revision as of 15:57, 30 July 2015
Q: Why does this article characterize pedophilia as a mental or psychiatric disorder?- A: Fundamentally, Misplaced Pages articles need to reflect the consensus expressed in the best-available reliable sources. Those sources characterize pedophilia as a mental or psychiatric disorder, so this article must as well. Those sources state that a mental disorder is a mental or behavioral pattern or anomaly that causes distress, disability or a strong impulse to harm oneself or others. Because pedophilia creates a strong impulse to have sexual relations with prepubertal children (an act which is innately harmful), and people with the disorder that avoid doing so often suffer great distress, it is considered to be a mental disorder. This is what differentiates it from other types of sexual attractions or orientations that do not innately lead to harm or distress.
- A: Information on Misplaced Pages must rely first and foremost on reliable sources that can be independently verified. Sources come in many forms but some are clearly better than others. Peer-reviewed journal articles, major published manuals and textbooks are considered very reliable, while personal blog posts or anonymous forums are often nearly worthless and almost never acceptable. This article in particular is about a topic in the area of medicine, and so requires a much higher standard of source than, say, an article about a fictional television program. Another key matter in excluding some material is the concept of fringe theories; sources that represent extremely minor and often flawed views of a topic that are plainly contradicted by more rigorous and reliable sources. For pedophilia in particular there are many fringe points of view that exist, but few have any scientific backing verifiable by reliable sources, and many are outright discredited for questionable relevance or due to the author(s) clearly having ulterior motives, i.e. being a pedophile themselves attempting to justify or normalize their behavior.
- A: Covering this particular sub-topic is highly problematic for several reasons. The term "pedophilia" itself did not exist until the 19th century, and was coined specifically to refer to a mental illness with set criteria. While the condition no doubt existed prior to that, there was no way to categorize or name it, and thus no reliable source exists labeling any historical person as having "pedophilia." Labeling a historical person based on sexual behavior alone, especially a single recorded perpetration, is also problematic because not all child sexual abusers are pedophiles. The person's internal mental "drive" to engage in such behavior is a key component in diagnosis, something that is almost always missing from historical accounts. A third problem is that the vast majority of such recorded instances in history that people often think of actually would not qualify, because the "child" victim was at or past puberty, whereas pedophilia only refers to prepubescent children.