Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 23:23, 6 January 2013

The neutrality of this article is disputed. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until conditions to do so are met. (January 2013) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

This article may lend undue weight to certain ideas, incidents, or controversies. Please help improve it by rewriting it in a balanced fashion that contextualizes different points of view. (January 2013) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject. It may require cleanup to comply with Misplaced Pages's content policies, particularly neutral point of view. Please discuss further on the talk page. (January 2013) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

Hebephilia is one of several types of chronophilia (a preference for a sexual partner who appears to be of a specific age), in this case a primary or exclusive sexual interest in pubescent individuals approximately 11–14 years old. Hebephilia differs from ephebophilia, which refers to the sexual preference for individuals in later adolescence, and from pedophilia, which refers to the sexual preference for prepubescent children. The onset of puberty varies from child to child, but, on average, girls begin the process of puberty at age 10 or 11; boys at age 11 or 12. While individuals with a sexual preference for adults may have some sexual interest in pubescent-aged individuals, true hebephilia is characterized by a preference of pubescent rather than adult partners.

Ray Blanchard and a number of his colleagues from the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health found that sex offenders could be separated into groups by victim age preference on the basis of penile plethysmograph response patterns. They noted that the DSM-5 could account for these data such as by subdividing the existing diagnosis of pedophilia into hebephilia and a more narrow definition of pedophilia. The proposed addition to the DSM V was criticized by Richard Green, Allen Frances, Michael First, an editor of the DSM-IV, Karen Franklin, Charles Allen Moser, William O'Donohue, and other mental health professionals.

Etiology

As with sexual preference in general, it is not known what causes someone to prefer a pubescent rather than an adult individual for sexual reasons. Researchers from the Toronto-based Centre for Addiction and Mental Health has conducted a series of studies on physical and psychological correlates of hebephilia, including height, handedness, intelligence quotient and failing a grade. According to the researchers, the results support a neurodevelopmental etiology for hebephilia.

Prevalence

The prevalence of hebephilia within the general population is unknown. There is evidence suggesting that within clinical and correctional samples, as well as anonymous surveys of people sexually interested in children, there are more individuals with an erotic interest in pubescent rather than in prepubescent children.

DSM-5 debate

General

A 2009 research paper proposed that, based on penile plethysmograph, sex offenders could be separated into groups by victim age preference. Blanchard noted that the most common age of victim for sexual offenders was 14 years and suggested there were qualitative differences between sex offenders who preferred pubertal versus prepubertal victims. The paper concluded that the DSM-5 could better account for those data if it split DSM-IV-TR's current criteria for pedophilia (attraction to children generally under 13) into pedophilia (attracted to prepubescent children, generally younger than 11) and hebephilia (attracted to early pubescent children, generally 11-14 years old). What DSM-IV called pedophilia would instead be termed "pedohebephilia". The proposed criteria for DSM-5 involved an adult who, for six or more months, experienced sexual attraction to prepubescent or pubescent children that was equal to or greater than their attraction to adults, who also found the attraction distressing, used child pornography and/or sought sexual stimulation from a child. The adult must be at least 18 years of age and at least five years older than the child. The proposed changes were presented at a 2009 meeting of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, generating considerable discussion. Participants questioned the relevance of the number of victims and inclusion of child pornography as part of the criteria, as well as the implication that sexual attraction to pubescent children is abnormal.

Responses

Blanchard's article attracted a several responses. Clinical psychologist Joseph Plaud criticized the study for lacking a control groups of post-pubescent and normal patterns of male sexual arousal, overlap between groups Blanchard believed were separate, and lack of specificity in the data. Blanchard replied that the initial publication used sex offenders who had committed crimes against post-pubescent adults as a control group, and that the results supported victim age preferences being a continuous rather than categorical variable.

The article also attracted criticism from gender identity specialist Richard Green, and physician and kink-advocate Charles Allen Moser, while child sexual abuse researcher William O'Donohue argued that the proposal did not go far enough. Blanchard replied to these concerns.

Professor of social work Jerome Wakefield described the inclusion as an inappropriate extension of the existing well-validated category of pedophilia, which would carry significant risk of false positives, and ignored the large qualitative distinctions between prepubescent children and sexually mature pubescents. He summarized his discussion with the statement "it appears that the hebephilia proposal is one where criminality and social disapproval are being confused with mental disorder."

During academic conferences for the American Academy of Psychiatry and Law and International Association for the Treatment of Sexual Offenders, symbolic votes were taken regarding whether the DSM-V should include pedohebephilia, and in both cases an overwhelming majority voted against this.

As a variation of normal sexual desires

Defence psychologist Karen Franklin has criticized hebephilia for pathologizing and criminalizing a "widespread and, indeed, evolutionarily adaptive" sexual attraction of homosexual and heterosexual males who, across cultures and throughout history "tend to prefer youthful partners who are at the peak of both beauty and reproductive fertility". Franklin also objects to the use of hebephilia during trials of individuals who may be imprisoned on the basis of sexually violent predator laws in the United States. A similar comment was made by DSM-IV editor Michael First, who also questioned the degree to which hebephilic offenders might be opportunistically preying on vulnerable adolescents rather than expressing a pathological desire.

History

The term is based on the Greek goddess and protector of youth Hebe, but in Ancient Greece also referred to the time before manhood in Athens (depending on the reference, the specific age could be 14, 16 or 18 years old). The suffix -philia is derived from -phil-, implying love or strong friendship.

In 1914, physician Kurt Boas described hebephilia as "an alleged form of female fetishism." Anthropologist and ethnopsychiatrist Paul K. Benedict use the term to distinguish pedophiles from sex offenders whose victims were adolescents. Forensic psychologist Karen Franklin traced the history of use of the term in a 2010 article. She states that it is a variation of ephebophilia, used by Magnus Hirschfeld in 1906 to describe homosexual attraction to males between puberty and their early 20s, who considered the condition normal and nonpathological. Historically, criminal hebephilic acts where victims were "biologically ready for coitus" (i.e. statutory rape) were considered distinct from other forms of criminal sexuality such as rape and pedophilia, with wide variations within and across nations regarding what age was acceptable for adult-adolescent sexual contacts. Bernard Glueck, Jr. conducted research on sex offenders at Sing Sing prison in the 1950s, using "hebephilia" as one of several classifications of subjects according to offense. In the 1960s, sexologist Kurt Freund used the term to distinguish between age preferences of homosexual and heterosexual men during penile plethysmograph assessments, continuing his work with Ray Blanchard at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH) after emigrating to Canada in 1968. After Freund's death in 1996, researchers at CAMH conducted research on neurological explanations of pedophilia, transexuality and homosexuality, and based on this research, hypothesized that hebephiles could also be distinguished on the basis of neurological and physiological measures. In 1999 a separate group, spurred by the Catholic sex abuse cases, attempted to develop a psychological test by combining questions from the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory and Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory, using the terms hebephilia to classify individuals attracted to adolescent members of the opposite sex. The group lobbied to create a new diagnosis of ephebophilia to identify individuals who had sexually abused adolescents; their efforts were unsuccessful. In court cases where the term "hebephilia" is used, it is placed within the DSM category of paraphilia, not otherwise specified.

See also

• Precocious puberty

References

1. ^ Krafft-Ebing, R (1924). Psychopathia Sexualis, with Especial Reference to the Antipathic Sexual Instinct; a Medico-Forensic Study. Stuttgart: Ferdinand Enke. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
2. Kail, RV (2010). Human Development: A Lifespan View (5th ed.). Cengage Learning. pp. 296. ISBN 0495600377. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
3. Attention: This template ({{cite pmid}}) is deprecated. To cite the publication identified by PMID 4714830 , please use {{cite journal}} with |pmid= 4714830 instead.
4. ^ Attention: This template ({{cite doi}}) is deprecated. To cite the publication identified by doi:10.1007/s10508-008-9399-9, please use {{cite journal}} (if it was published in a bona fide academic journal, otherwise {{cite report}} with |doi=10.1007/s10508-008-9399-9 instead.
5. ^ Attention: This template ({{cite doi}}) is deprecated. To cite the publication identified by doi:10.1007/s10508-010-9602-7, please use {{cite journal}} (if it was published in a bona fide academic journal, otherwise {{cite report}} with |doi=10.1007/s10508-010-9602-7 instead.
6. ^ Attention: This template ({{cite pmid}}) is deprecated. To cite the publication identified by PMID 21389170 , please use {{cite journal}} with |pmid= 21389170 instead.
7. ^ Frieden, J (2009-12-01). "DSM-V work on paraphilias begins in earnest" (pdf). Clinical Psychiatry News. 37 (12): 21. Retrieved 2013-01-07.
8. ^ Attention: This template ({{cite doi}}) is deprecated. To cite the publication identified by doi:10.1002/bsl.934, please use {{cite journal}} (if it was published in a bona fide academic journal, otherwise {{cite report}} with |doi=10.1002/bsl.934 instead.
9. ^ Attention: This template ({{cite doi}}) is deprecated. To cite the publication identified by doi:10.1007/s10508-008-9436-8, please use {{cite journal}} (if it was published in a bona fide academic journal, otherwise {{cite report}} with |doi=10.1007/s10508-008-9436-8 instead.
10. ^ Attention: This template ({{cite doi}}) is deprecated. To cite the publication identified by doi:10.1007/s10508-010-9604-5, please use {{cite journal}} (if it was published in a bona fide academic journal, otherwise {{cite report}} with |doi=10.1007/s10508-010-9604-5 instead.
11. Attention: This template ({{cite doi}}) is deprecated. To cite the publication identified by doi: 10.1007/s11194-007-9060-5, please use {{cite journal}} (if it was published in a bona fide academic journal, otherwise {{cite report}} with |doi= 10.1007/s11194-007-9060-5 instead.
12. Attention: This template ({{cite pmid}}) is deprecated. To cite the publication identified by PMID 16010467, please use {{cite journal}} with |pmid= 16010467 instead.
13. Attention: This template ({{cite pmid}}) is deprecated. To cite the publication identified by PMID 16708284, please use {{cite journal}} with |pmid= 16708284 instead.
14. Gebhard, PH (1965). Sex offenders: An analysis of types. New York: Harper & Row. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
15. Attention: This template ({{cite pmid}}) is deprecated. To cite the publication identified by PMID 12071103 , please use {{cite journal}} with |pmid= 12071103 instead.
16. Bernard, F (1975). "An enquiry among a group of pedophiles". The Journal of Sex Research. 11 (3): 242–255.
17. Attention: This template ({{cite doi}}) is deprecated. To cite the publication identified by doi: 10.1016/0191-8869(83)90154-X, please use {{cite journal}} (if it was published in a bona fide academic journal, otherwise {{cite report}} with |doi= 10.1016/0191-8869(83)90154-X instead.
18. ^ Attention: This template ({{cite doi}}) is deprecated. To cite the publication identified by doi: 10.1007/s10615-011-0353-2, please use {{cite journal}} (if it was published in a bona fide academic journal, otherwise {{cite report}} with |doi= 10.1007/s10615-011-0353-2 instead.
19. Attention: This template ({{cite doi}}) is deprecated. To cite the publication identified by doi:10.1007/s10508-008-9423-0, please use {{cite journal}} (if it was published in a bona fide academic journal, otherwise {{cite report}} with |doi=10.1007/s10508-008-9423-0 instead.
20. ^ Attention: This template ({{cite doi}}) is deprecated. To cite the publication identified by doi:10.1007/s10508-008-9427-9, please use {{cite journal}} (if it was published in a bona fide academic journal, otherwise {{cite report}} with |doi=10.1007/s10508-008-9427-9 instead.
21. Attention: This template ({{cite doi}}) is deprecated. To cite the publication identified by doi:10.1007/s10508-010-9610-7, please use {{cite journal}} (if it was published in a bona fide academic journal, otherwise {{cite report}} with |doi=10.1007/s10508-010-9610-7 instead.
22. Franklin, K (2011). "Forensic Psychiatrists Vote No on Proposed Paraphilias". Psychiatric Times. 27 (12). (subscription required)
23. Powell, A (2007). Paedophiles, Child Abuse and the Internet: A Practical Guide to Identification, Action and Prevention. Radcliffe Publishing. pp. 4-5. ISBN 1857757742.
24. Boas, K (1914). "Über Hebephilie, eine angebliche Form des weiblichen Fetischismus". Archiv für Kriminialanthropologie. 61: 1–38.
25. Attention: This template ({{cite doi}}) is deprecated. To cite the publication identified by doi: 10.1007/BF01568731, please use {{cite journal}} (if it was published in a bona fide academic journal, otherwise {{cite report}} with |doi= 10.1007/BF01568731 instead.

External links

• List of research articles on hebephilia maintained by James Cantor
• List of articles on the diagnostic controversy maintained by Karen Franklin

• Sexuality and age