Why do people defend female pedophilia

How free does pedophilia make?

Günter Amendt, who once came from the student movement and is now a member of the DKP, is a sex pedagogue and published the widely acclaimed book "Sexfront" ten years ago. A contemporary version of the Sex Front, the "Sex Book", was recently published, in which he deals with the sexuality of young people with young people. In short: Günter is probably not suspected of wanting to deprive children and young people of their joy ... He is also a board member of the "German Society for Sexual Research", which would have an advisory role in the event of a change in the law of the criminal paragraphs affecting pedophilia. - It would be hoped that this conversation and the column would help to raise awareness of the new dangers of apparent liberalization. We hope that all concerned remain open to discussion and consider EMMA to be one of the possible forums for this.

Günter We should speak openly about our fears that in this discussion we will suddenly become guardians of bourgeois morality. I also only see this conversation as an approximation of the topic. At the same time, we are not only exposing ourselves to attacks from the "scene"; With my position I also contradict what some colleagues who work in sex science represent.

Alice Your scruples honor you. To be honest, I am less reluctant to take a position that is undoubtedly scolded as "reactionary" by not a few who see themselves as progressive. As a feminist, I've had to get used to this balancing act in recent years. Especially when it comes to moral and sexual questions, we increasingly have to contradict an all too brisk libertinage that is proclaimed by men and usually only at the expense of women. This is about an even weaker group that is even more worthy of protection: it is about children.

Günter As a sex educator, I deal with the sexuality of children and young people, and I am in favor of them being able to live their sexuality freely. On the other hand, of course, I also keep an eye on the victims - who in turn make others, namely the children, victims - and that is something that depresses me. Because one thing is clear: for the person affected, pedophilia is the "solution" to a serious psychological conflict. Those who fail to find this solution will end up in schizophrenia or suicide. My particular vulnerability stems from this conflict of interests: wanting to defend both the victims and the victims of the victims. I can already hear how I am advised to forget such scruples. Because typical of the current discussion is precisely the refusal of many pedophiles to understand their sexual fixation on children as something that makes them the victims of coercion.

Alice I also imagine many a pedophile résumé to be tragic. But as a woman I have to say: I am primarily interested in the victims' victims. And that is exactly what nobody is talking about in this whole pseudo-progressive discussion. The needs of adults are simply equated with those of children. The pedophile groups simply act as child liberators - and that is the most mendacious part of the whole debate: this is not about the sexuality of children, but the sexuality of adults who like to do it with children.

Günter I believe that as adults we both advocate children's rights to sexuality. But that does not mean that we stand up for the right of adults to the sexuality of children. We are dealing here with a highly political issue, I think, that is being discussed in a completely non-political way. And that's the alarming thing.

Alice It is alarming that in this debate it is quite simply denied that it is a question of a relationship of domination - namely that between an adult and a child - and that up to now hardly anyone has asked the question: Why is pedophilia being propagated in this way, of all times , of the taz to Quick? Why is it precisely in a phase in which, thanks to feminist work, the inequality between men and women is becoming more and more conscious, including sexuality as an instrument of domination, that equality between adults and children is succinctly assumed? Are men now fleeing the increasing complications with women into the simplicity of a "relationship" with a child, in whose eyes they are always the big boss?

Günter A thesis that I also find obvious. Just - let's first define exactly what we mean by pedophilia. By this I mean the sexuality of adults with prepubescent girls and boys. Even clearer: it is an obsessive and exclusive fixation on childish sexual objects. It is also important to say that this is not primarily a homosexual problem ...

Alice ...certainly not. But the debate so far has been led almost entirely by homosexual pedophiles.

Günter Because the pressure on homosexual pedophiles is greater. Heterosexual pedophilia usually takes place in family and acquaintances. A husband and father who has molested their 12-year-old daughter will not be reported as easily as a stranger who has towed away a stranger. Homosexual pedophiles have to make their problem public whether they like it or not. But if they go public or if they leave the protection of anonymity, they tend to increase the level of suffering they are under. More publicity also means more control.

Alice In the newly flared up discussion, pedophilia is often disguised as "loving contact with children". It must therefore be said very clearly that we do not understand pedophilia to mean a general sensual relationship between adults and children, no cuddling or skin contact and, of course, no sexual attraction that an adult feels in relation to a child. By pedophilia we mean the sexuality exercised between adults and children.

Günter Exactly. The decisive point is where the child's autonomy, namely wanting something completely different, is no longer accepted and the whole process is still interpreted with adult thinking, followed by adult needs. This is where my criticism starts because it is about relationships between unequal, about domination and ultimately about exploitation. That is not how we meant the liberation of sexuality ten years ago. For us, sexuality today has always been the relationship between sexuality and domination. We understood that at the time - and this is exactly what is hidden here. In this respect, pedophilia cannot be understood as the logical development of a discussion on emancipation that has already started. There is a serious break.

Alice And that's exactly why - because the liberté, for which we have stood up and will continue to stand up, has degenerated into libertinage here - it seems so important to me that we express ourselves critically and publicly on the subject ...

Günter With restrictions. Isn't it better if a totally isolated boy or girl who is emotionally impoverished and impoverished and beaten by the birth father or even by the mother (there is also that), if such a child instead finds an adult who is lovingly affectionate to it is, it promotes.

Alice But you're kidding yourself ... On the one hand, the alternative - either flogging parents or affectionate lover - seems very constructed to me. This is just as ludicrous as the talk of the overfed lap dogs who are doing so well and the abused children who are so badly. Just because a few lap dogs would get less to eat and a few adults would be interested in sexuality with children, after all, children in general would not be abused ... On the other hand, there is still no evidence that pedophiles are always friendly and cautious with children. So far, much speaks for the opposite! We know it about heterosexual pedophilia, as the medical and police annals tell terrifying things about the physical condition of so many little girls who have been abused by their own fathers. Not to mention the psychological ... In addition: Nobody prevents these supposedly child-friendly pedophiles from promoting the little ones - but without wanting to buy the right to the sexual availability of children.

Günter Many pedophiles refer to antiquity and all this educated bourgeois fuss. But the ancient Greeks were not pedophiles, but pederasts, so they had no sexual relationships with children before puberty, but with sexually mature boys, growing men. And that for rather suspicious motives. Reimut Reiche and Martin Dannecker say, for example, that pederasty among the ancient Greeks was nothing more than the attempt to keep the knowledge of domination of the ruling class under themselves - to the detriment of women and slaves. The craft of war, education and knowledge were passed on from the adult man to the growing man. Pedagogue: boy driver. Have you ever heard of girls' bosses ...?

Alice Incidentally, pedophilia and pederasty are being lumped together again today. And that's as confusing as it is obscuring. For example, the book by Peter Schult, "Visits to Dead End", published by Trikont, plays a major role in the current discussion. However, Schult has no, or should one say: not yet ?, sexual relationships with pre-pubescent children, but with adolescents. Now for me this is a completely different discussion, and I am fundamentally in favor of the impunity of voluntary sexual relations in adolescents, no matter with whom. But I just as fundamentally find all sexual relationships in dependence extremely problematic and not at all worth promoting. And it is precisely this criterion that fully applies to Schult, who coquettishly calls himself a "homosexual anarchist". I don't know what is anarchistic about his stories, because after all, God knows, anarchism is not simply a violation of existing regulations at any cost ... Schult begins his career as a pederast as a home manager who has sexual relations with pupils: he continues as a legionnaire who buys Arab boys (in the narrowest sense of the word!); and is now a "left-wing hero" who fishes up Trebegänger from the street in Munich, offers them a bed and a bit of emotionality and expects sex in return. And then he's also proud that he doesn't force it to do so. As if there weren't any more subtle forms of coercion ... His 15- to 16-year-olds always had him in friendly memories, he writes as a justification. I even believe it. As a woman, I found myself very much in this book. Not in the part of Schult, however, but in that of the boy. This hunger for love, this friendly-making yourself available, this saying-yourself-also-still-saying: He was actually really nice to me ... Of course, these young people can hardly admit to themselves afterwards that they are being abused were! Neither can we women.

Günter That's right. But what role are we talking in here now? There is still a secondary theater of war that is the main theater of war for those affected, namely the court. Let us imagine that we were appraisers in court in the following case: A 40-year-old man had a sexual relationship with an 11-year-old boy at the beginning that lasted for three or four years. The criteria for funding were given objectively. Do we rate the sexual acts so highly that we agree to the usual punishment? I am not quoting this case by chance. It is a case that I know of and that plays an exemplary role in the current deliberations. The boy is 19 today and, by the way, has become homosexual. Most of the sexual acts back then resulted in the boy jerking off the man, a 40-year-old doctor. Because he just thought it was fun for the adult. He hardly felt anything himself. But he enjoyed the relationship itself. Why am I telling you this? Because I want to get away from this narrow concept of sexuality, because I believe that if you isolate it, you overemphasize sexuality. For me, the negative of this relationship is elsewhere. This boy was forced into the role of a girl by this man and he produced all these typical girl behavior: he advertised flirtatiously for the man, was always cute, to please him and even today, as a halfway adult, has an identity problem.

Alice Yes, I think that's a very important aspect: to see that not only the sexual act itself plays a role for the child, but also - and sometimes above all! - the emotional and social context in which it all takes place, and which always comes down to one thing: fixing the child in its child role! Because that is exactly what constitutes pedophilia: that the pedophile obsessively only desires children, that is, wants and has to keep the child in child status.

Günter And it is precisely that, the social character of this relationship, that I consider to be the most serious. This example shows what the harm was for this child. Namely, to be pushed into a role that still gives him difficulties today and which also corrupts. The child knew very well: He can't refuse this or that wish at all, otherwise I'll tell my mother everything, and she might run to the cadre ... This boy never did any of that, but he always knew he was it could have done. And there is another one who wants to say that these are relationships among equals ...

Alice The social damage is exacerbated when the child is female.

Günter I was just about to bring in. I claim that the purely sexual process is more harmless in men anyway. Just imagine what kind of sexuality you can practice there. The boy will or won't have an erection doesn't matter. The man is going to rub his genitals on the boy for me or have someone jerk off. None of this is so serious. There are hardly any cases where there is anal intercourse. At least one hardly knows such cases in the literature. However, one should also ask oneself whether the assertions of many homosexual pedophiles that anal penetration never occurs in their sexual practice cannot also be a protective claim. Penetration would then be rape, and we are assuming some kind of relationship here ...

Alice In relationships with little girls, however, penetration is almost always and almost compulsively ...

Günter And even if there is no penetration, this girl is aware of the possibility that penetration may occur. That is what is serious about father-daughter incest - even if it is never realized, the girl knows exactly that in an emergency it would always result in penetration. And that's why I believe the effects are more traumatic on girls than on boys.

Alice Certainly. I experienced this myself through encounters with exhibitionists (for whom the pedophile groups also demand impunity, by the way). These encounters are such aggression and humiliation for a girl, for a woman - it can break you all day. A physical attack, a slap in the face wouldn't be that bad ... And as far as sexuality with children is concerned, girls almost always have coitus. Traditionally, this is practically compulsive between men and women. And, unfortunately, incest is realized much more often than we all want to admit. There are enormous numbers of unreported cases ... In addition, pedophilia with little girls is always a potentiation of the relationship of domination: with boys it is the adult with a child, with girls it is the adult with a child and, in addition, the man with a girl.

Günter Right.

Alice Incidentally, it has recently become a matter of course to pretend that there are also pedophile women. Some sexologists advocating pedophilia - such as the Dutchman Benard - assume this, as do the local pedophile groups. I doubt it. Even more: I claim it is not true. In all of the scientific literature, I know of no cases of female pedophilia, nor from my own experience. And in the discussions on the scene, one and the same prime case is cited again and again as evidence of female pedophilia: A 19-year-old whose boyfriend claims to be a pedophile and who, so to speak, instructed her in the secrets of child love. Now she's doing it like him. Classic female behavior: the girlfriend tries as hard as possible to follow him in his sexual behavior, to imitate him. You often find that, and it seems to me to be the case in this case too.However, a single woman who claims to be a pedophile does not make the whole thing a phenomenon that occurs equally in both sexes. Personally, I have very fundamental doubts that women can be pedophiles at all, that is, sexually obsessively fixated on children. Why? Because for women, sexuality is not the exercise of domination. That is a decisive factor.

Günter I think that about this 19-year-old is an interesting thought. I know the case too, but I haven't given myself any thought about the fact that she keeps referring to the fact that her boyfriend has basically introduced her to the secrets of pedophilia. - As for the relationship between women and children, don't you think that conditioning for motherly love also plays a role?

Alice Sure, of course.

Günter For example, if a 13-year-old is rubbed off by his mother after bathing, that would be subsumed under motherly love, would be accepted; if the father rubs off the girl of the same age - who is physically more mature according to her developmental shift - at least the suspicion that this is a pedophile act would arise more quickly. So, if there were any female pedophiles at all, they would be integrated into what is commonly referred to as maternal love and care.

Alice Basically true. Two things should be noted: Firstly, what appears to be the same action can imply different things, and when the father and the girl rub the head after bathing, something is certainly different from that of the mother and the boy - you did that yourself earlier said when you spoke of this ever-present possibility and threat of penetration. Second, we had agreed that, according to our definition, that would not be pedophilia. We are now concerned with the execution of sexual acts by adults with children and with compulsiveness, with the sexual fixation of adults exclusively on children. Or? Because in general it is a very desirable thing that one breaks through these age gottos in love, also in sexuality. That you could fall in love with someone younger - but also with someone older.

Günter Exactly. We also have to see that most of us are not only compulsively homosexual or compulsive heterosexual, but are also compulsively set at a certain age. Just as I see desirable sexual behavior in bisexuality, so I also affirm age-transcending sexuality. We just have to keep in mind what is wish and what is reality ...

Alice Yes. And just as free bisexuality seems possible today - due to the power balance between the sexes - just as little is free sexuality with children possible because they are addicts.

Günter ... and yes, have a completely different sexuality. Isn't there a mix-up between sexuality and sensuality? We adults have a genital understanding of sexuality: it's all down below. We watch children slide and cuddle from lap to lap - and misinterpret the signal. That is sensual, that is erotic, that is aimed at tenderness and is also perceived subjectively as sexual by the children. If you think back, you know that you had orgasm-like conditions back then ... But that we adults now believe that we have to bring our concept of sexuality through, I consider - to put it mildly - a misunderstanding.

Alice If you look closely at the experiences described by pedophiles or pederasts, it is always very clear that these are relationships of dependency and that the children or adolescents accept sex just to get something else. A child wants a buddy, a warm meal, a roof over their head, a little love ... and that's what they'll make available. The adults always only talk about their sexual feelings, what is going on with the children is not really up for discussion. This becomes very clear with Schult, for example. Günter: The pedophile relationship is similar to the man / woman relationship. It is a power relationship.

Alice Even more extreme! And the fact that this discussion has intensified and suddenly become public in recent years is clearly related to the emancipation of women. The women no longer function that way, are less available - and now it's the turn of the children. Men can still play man with them.

Günter There is no intermediate argument. The first reaction was the bisexuality discussion. In view of the women's movement and in view of the emancipating gays, certain men have fled into bisexuality, which, however, according to my observations, I consider a pseudo-bisexuality that is not lived out at all. It is more of a postulate with which, on the one hand, they can evade the new type of woman with which they cannot cope; and on the other hand the gays, towards whom they also have certain ambivalences. Zack, withdraw into bisexuality and create a space for yourself in which you are no longer vulnerable. Block on both sides. Now comes your reasoning. I also think that this is a reaction to the fact that women are no longer available. You have already landed with the child.

Alice ... which, by the way, does not make any sexual demands either. Which can only be right for these men who are insecure about their potency.

Günter As far as the women's movement leads to certain potency problems in men of a certain generation - which is undeniable.

Alice ... and the least we can expect ...

Günter For example, if you look at the description in the Zitty booklet. A pedophile describes exactly how he imagines such a boy of his desires: the cheerful, melancholy nature and childlike disposition, the dear milk face, the eyes, the hair, the soft, velvety enamel of the boy's hairless skin ... That is a fetishist - like a lingerie fetishist who tells you the color of a pair of underpants he needs to be sexually aroused - including the tips that have to be on, without which he can't do it. Traditionally women are treated as fetishes. And that is precisely what is less possible with women today.

Alice What is striking about this progressive discussion of pedophilia in left-wing scene newspapers such as Zitty or TAZ is that, alongside this very undisguised description of children as objects, there is a completely imposed claim that pedophiles are child liberators ... and not even the slightest question pedophiles themselves based on their motives for their obsessive fixation on children.

Günter One could take that to be a characteristic of every emancipation movement in a certain phase. Indeed, such questions are not asked. The homosexuals have also resolutely rejected the question of the origin of homosexuality.

Alice Subtle difference: there are no victims among homosexuals either. But wherever you make people into victims through your behavior, there is a moral and political obligation for every group that sees itself as emancipatory to question itself.

Günter Whereby you forget that, purely emotionally, many pedophiles are themselves infantile. By "infantile" I mean childish, not childlike. I am thinking, for example, of the Indian commune that lives somewhere in the Franconian region. I saw them during the discussions at Homolulu, the gay meeting in Frankfurt, so, 26- and 27-year-olds fall into a childish scheme, stamp their feet and say to you: Talk to me in such a way that even a child can understand it would ...

Alice You might be talking about the new pedophiles, if I may call it that. But the classic pedophile is definitely an adult!

Günter That's right. I'm talking about the scene pedophiles now. We should separate that, you're right. But it is from them that this whole pedophile emancipation discussion is based.

Alice Seemingly. In truth, that's just the tip of an iceberg. Pedophilia is also becoming increasingly socially acceptable in the tabloids and treated as a trivial offense. See Polanski ... And it has long been a topic in Spiegel, Stern or Quick as well as in TAZ or Pflasterstrand. The most slogan-like, even demagogic, discussion so far has been conducted in the left-wing scene. Because not only the relationships of domination are simply negated, but it is also incredibly pretend that this is about the liberation of children, and even more: about liberation from childhood. It has to be said that childhood is really relative and that the childhood ghetto is actually not a natural one, but one that has become culturally. But this ghetto cannot be abolished by decree. Fundamental things would have to change for this if the economic independence of the children were a basic requirement (Sulamith Firestone wrote an excellent chapter on this in her book). Here and now, however, children are addicts - the negation of this dependency is a concealment and thus an intensification of the existing. This is no different from other dependent groups, blacks or women ...

Günter That’s why it’s so wrong when past centuries are used for this sexual libertinage towards children. We no longer live in first nature, where we are just a creature, but we live in a second nature, one that is socially deformed and deformed. We have to deal with that. Sexuality and love, this pair of terms, has become something historically. Anyone who praises medieval impartiality, where everyone was doing it in front of everyone in one room, is ultimately propagating a sex education that considers it important to teach children how to fuck ... For me such ideologies are a kind of sexual Darwinism: the right of the stronger over the weaker! Nobody asks anymore: How does that get into me? What am I doing with it? The only question left is: What do I do to myself if I don't meet my needs? If I don't act out my sado-masochism and my fetishism, my exhibitionism, or my pedophilia. That is exactly what sexual Darwinism is.

Alice It is actually infinitely difficult to have equal relationships. Especially in sexuality, which as an elementary part of the love relationship is the most privileged terrain of human relationships today. People are so easily abused, and it is particularly important here to help ensure that everyone has a chance to live an equal, mutual sexuality. If inequalities and dependencies play a role in the objective circumstances, it always becomes problematic. There are also dependency relationships among adults, especially between the sexes. But there are degrees of dependency and thus degrees of protection. Adults should come to terms with all of this - in the context of political reflection, of course. But children, and this is the crucial point, seem to me to be worthy of protection because of their increased dependency. And if a society doesn't regulate itself there - as a truly emancipated society would - they just have to be protected by the law.

Günter Adorno once wrote that the allegation of the purity, naivety and innocence of the child is undoubtedly the greatest taboo of this time. And the stronger a taboo, the greater the need to break it. Especially in a scene that sees itself as a taboo breaker. We should be careful not to dismiss pedophilia as a marginalized problem. It is a problem that affects society as a whole. All the sex tourism that is currently going on tends to be child prostitution tourism. It starts at Bahnhof Zoo, the children's line in West Berlin, and extends to child trafficking in the third world, to the boy trafficking in Mexico, which is transported to California. In Southeast Asia, too, there are hardly any women - which is bad enough - but almost exclusively girls, whom imperialist tourism makes use of. People are exploited in their immediate physicality here, especially women. And now increasingly female children too.

Alice That is why the subject of pedophilia concerns us women so much. Not only because this is about children to whom we have traditionally been particularly close. Not only because once again nobody represents the cause of the victims of the victims. But also because pedophilia is a valve that is now increasingly opening up to the pressure of women's emancipation. Men who are actually interested in emancipatory changes or who are at least open-minded should not fool themselves. The point here must not be to make pedophilia salon- or flat-share-compatible: not to sanction a further escalation in the power relations; Instead, it must be about making power relations transparent, protecting those who have been extradited and tackling the thirst for power self-critically.

Continue reading
Comment from Alice Schwarzer: Polanski & Freundinnen (6/09),
The crushing judgment (5/93)
It started with Freud (5/93)
Fake Child Friends (5/93)
What is a father (10/92)
Goodbye Woody Allen (10/92)
Editorial by Alice Schwarzer: Is Pedophilia Emancipated? (4/80)