Conference of the Nordic Association for Clinical Sexology, Oslo 2011.

1. Right to
DESIRE
What about
pedophilia?
Tommi Paalanen
Philosopher
Specialist in sexual ethics
Chair, Sexpo Foundation
FINLAND

2. SEXUAL RIGHTS
sexual freedom
autonomy
pleasure
(WAS)

3. SEXUAL RIGHTS
express sexuality freely
enjoy sexuality
(IPPF)

4. SEXUAL RIGHTS
pursue satisfying, safe and
pleasurable sexual life
(WHO)

5. SEXUAL RIGHTS
full enjoyment of freedom
of opinion and expression
(Yogyakarta principles)

6. DILEMMA
Every person is entitled to sexual rights
A person with pedophilic desires is a person
How should we promote sexual rights in this
case?

7. SOLUTIONS

8. EU DIRECTIVE PROPOSAL 2010
Child pornography
(iii) any material that visually depicts any
person appearing to be a child --
(iv) realistic images of a child -- regardless of
the actual existence of such child –
child = under 18 years

9. Lupe
Fuentes
20 years

10. ”Hue”
computer
graphics
by K.Jun

11. TIGHTENING UP
Expanding the scope of child porn
more convictions
collecting political goodwill
No proof of effectiveness in prevention
Research and therapy experiences suggest
the opposite!

12. CHALLENGES: criminology
Use of pornography exploded in western
countries  no increase in sex crimes
(Diamond 2009-2010)
Child pornography legal in Chech, Denmark
and Japan for a period of time
sex crimes against children decrease
(Jozifkova, Weiss, Diamond 2010)

13. CHALLENGES: forensic psychiatry
Internet child porn offenders and actual child
molesters have usually different paths to the
crimes
Use of child pornography doesn’t predict
actual sex crimes, antisocial behavior does
(Fedoroff/IALMH 2011)
IALMH = International Academy for Law and Mental Health

14. CHALLENGES: preventive therapy
Permission and acceptance are the basic
elements of sexual counselling
(PLISSIT-model)
Sexual preferences cannot be erased,
controlling them requires positive ways of
realisation
(Nissinen/Sexpo Foundation)
Child pornography can be a substitute for
actualising pedophilic fantasies
(Jozifkova 2010; Neutze/IALMH 2011)

15. CONCLUSIONS
Proposed EU-directive seeks to criminalise
fantasies
 draconian and confusing
 violates sexual rights
 hampers crime prevention
Softer approach could work better
 preventive therapy instead of
punishment
 seeking help made easier
 frees resources

16. QUESTIONS
Can non-harmful realisation methods
(i.e. fictional child porn) be tools for crime
prevention?
Should we loosen up child porn legislation if
it helps in crime prevention?

17. THANK YOU!
tommi.paalanen@helsinki.fi