Since I am open about my lifelong mental health struggles, I am also open about having been institutionalized in a mental hospital. I belong (fortunately) to the small minority of people who need this. So I completely understand people who don’t have a typical sexual orientation. And not everyone needs to be hospitalized (for example).
“Medicine time,” a scream was heard from the corridor. “Well, look, we should really go there, they’ll start calling our names and I don’t want this.” He replied: “We don’t have to go now. There’ll be a guillotine for this! A guillotine—simple as that!” I am not going.” This man had voluntarily admitted himself to the hospital after barely managing to hold on to the railing of his balcony. He was scheduled to undergo electroconvulsive therapy in Prague.
Why am I writing this? Because being a pedophile means an immense social pressure, insults and condemnation from the majority in the majority of European countries. Maybe they are Nazi fans and they would like to finish it all. I don’t know.
A guillotine for pedophilia? A reality!
While some people in Europe really want pedophiles to dead, the risk of violent death is almost zero. Not everywhere in the world.
Punishments for child sexual abuse vary considerably across the world. In many countries, offenses involving sexual contact with minors carry some of the harshest penalties in criminal law. Depending on the severity of the crime, the victim’s age, the use of violence or coercion, and whether the offender has previous convictions, sentences may range from several years in prison to life imprisonment. In a small number of countries, the most serious offenses against children may even be punishable by death, although such laws remain rare and highly controversial. Many jurisdictions also impose additional restrictions after release, such as mandatory registration as a sex offender, limitations on employment involving children, electronic monitoring, or long-term supervision.
Death penalty and modern treatment
Legal systems differ not only in the length of prison sentences but also in their broader approach to prevention and rehabilitation. Some countries emphasize lengthy incarceration and strict post-release controls, while others combine punishment with compulsory psychological treatment aimed at reducing the risk of reoffending. In a small number of jurisdictions, chemical castration may be offered voluntarily or, in some cases, ordered by a court under specific legal conditions.
These policies remain controversial, with ongoing debates about their effectiveness, ethics, and compatibility with human rights. Likewise, the death penalty for child sexual offenses is fiercely debated. Disgusting! Supporters argue that argue that the gravity of these crimes justifies the harshest possible punishment, whereas critics contend that it has not been shown to deter offending more effectively than life imprisonment and may even create unintended consequences, such as reducing reporting or increasing the risk that offenders kill their victims to eliminate witnesses.
The most severe punishments are reserved for those who sexually abuse children, not for the mere presence of a sexual attraction to minors. Modern legal systems generally distinguish between a psychiatric condition—pedophilic disorder—and criminal acts committed against children. Having such an attraction is not itself a crime in most countries. Criminal liability arises when an individual commits sexual offenses, produces or possesses child sexual abuse material where prohibited by law, or engages in other unlawful conduct involving minors. This distinction reflects the principle that criminal law punishes actions rather than thoughts or attractions alone.
Trump is not a pedophile and my X mistake
I retweeted a post on Freethinkers International’s X account about Trump being a pedophile and while child sexual abuse is punished very harshly in many countries, he became president. I started reevaluating this and wondering. “Well, it is not good to say we admit an option of pedophilia being punishable. The vast majority of pedophiles have never touched a child. It sounds like I support it. And by the way, Trump may have abused children, but he is not a pedophile.”
So what did I do? I undid the retweet. Because the last thing I want is to spread lies and insult our readers, many whom have this sexual orientation (sexual disorder).
People from sexual minorities can find their partners. Pedophiles cannot
Since Europeans don’t live in the Middle Ages, Russia or China, belonging to a sexual minority doesn’t mean you cannot find a partner, except for pedophilia, zoophilia and necrophilia (maybe more).
A lot of people (straight, gay and so on) cannot imagine living without a partner. Pedophiles must. It is a kind of remainder of what my psychologist (not my psychiatrist) was swearing at. He took aim at priests and their repressed sexuality that may lead to child abuse.
AI-generated child sexual abuse material: A solution or a new problem?
Artificial intelligence has created a dilemma that hardly anyone imagined just a few years ago. If an image is generated entirely by AI and no real child is involved, should it be treated in the same way as material documenting the sexual abuse of an actual child? Politicians have rushed to answer this question with new laws. Scientists have not.
One group of researchers has proposed what is known as the substitution hypothesis. The idea is straightforward. If a person with pedophilic disorder can satisfy sexual urges using entirely fictional or AI-generated material, perhaps the likelihood of seeking contact with a real child will decrease. Since no child was abused to produce such images, supporters argue that there is no direct victim. Some even compare the issue to violent movies or video games. Millions of people enjoy fictional violence every day without becoming murderers. Could the same principle apply here?
Other researchers are far more skeptical. They argue that repeated exposure to AI-generated child sexual abuse material may reinforce sexual attraction to children, normalize abusive fantasies, or encourage some users to search for increasingly realistic content involving real victims. They also point out practical concerns. Artificial intelligence could make it easier to produce enormous quantities of illegal-looking material, complicate police investigations, and make it more difficult to distinguish genuine evidence of child abuse from fabricated images.
No scientific consensus
The truth is that nobody knows. Despite confident opinions on both sides of the debate, there is currently no scientific consensus. Researchers cannot ethically conduct experiments that would provide a definitive answer. They cannot divide people into groups, provide one group with AI-generated child sexual abuse material, and observe whether they later offend against children. Instead, they must rely on observational studies, interviews, clinical experience, and theoretical models. These approaches can generate hypotheses, but they cannot establish cause and effect with certainty.
This uncertainty explains why countries have adopted different legal approaches. Some have prohibited AI-generated child sexual abuse material altogether under the precautionary principle, arguing that the potential risks are too serious to ignore. Others distinguish between material involving real children and purely fictional depictions. As artificial intelligence becomes increasingly realistic and accessible, this debate is unlikely to disappear. On the contrary, it may become one of the most difficult legal, ethical, and psychological questions of the coming decade.
Freethinkers International has a lot of pedophiles among its members. Do you know any in real life?
As I wrote above, I didn’t want to insult our members. But imaging walking down the street, not caring about women, men, but being attracted to children.
I know a man who is just like that. And I told him: “Don’t you ever do anything wrong! The child will pay the price and you will end up in jail where they will treat you badly.”
And even though Czech jails are not what they used to be during communism and sexual predators are somewhat protected, it is still a jail.
Conclusion
Pedophilia is one of the few topics that almost completely shuts down rational discussion. The mere word provokes disgust, anger, and calls for the harshest possible punishments. Those crimes destroy lives and deserve severe punishment. Yet the public debate often ignores an important distinction. There is a fundamental difference between experiencing an unwanted sexual attraction and acting on it. Modern criminal justice systems recognize this difference because they punish crimes, not thoughts or attractions.
Protecting children must always remain society’s highest priority. Nevertheless, prevention is just as important as punishment. If people who recognize that they are attracted to children believe they will be treated as monsters regardless of whether they have committed a crime, some may avoid psychologists, psychiatrists, and support programs altogether. That benefits nobody. Encouraging non-offending individuals to seek confidential treatment may reduce the risk that a child will ever become a victim.
The debate should therefore be guided by evidence rather than emotion. Society can show absolutely no tolerance for child sexual abuse while at the same time recognizing that not everyone with pedophilic disorder is a criminal. Those who abuse children deserve justice. Those who have never harmed a child but actively seek help deserve access to professional treatment without being equated with offenders. These two positions are not contradictory. They are both essential if the goal is not only to punish abuse after it happens, but also to prevent it from happening in the first place.
Leave a Reply