The Errors of Karen Franklin's Pretextuality

Age Diversity Among Victims of Hebephilic Sexual Offenders

Hebephilia refers to sexual interest in pubescent children who are beginning to show early signs of sexual development but are sexually immature. The present study examined the relationship between hebephilia and victim age choice in a sample of 2,238 adult male sexual offenders. On average, offenders were 39 years old at the time of their assessments, and approximately half (48%) were referred by probation or parole offices. Assessment data included self-report, sexual arousal measured by volumetric phallometry, and victims' ages. Results suggested that, similar to pedophilia, hebephilia had a medium sized association with a greater number of victims under age 11 and a small sized association with a greater number of victims ages 11 to 14. Unlike pedophilia, a small positive association was consistently found between hebephilia and a greater number of victims ages 15 or 16. Furthermore, a small positive association was observed between victim age polymorphism and hebephilia and pedophilia. The present results suggested that hebephilia was associated with a greater number of victims age 14 or younger and had similar victim age correlates to pedophiles.

Hebephilia: A Postmortem Dissection

In 2008, the concept of hebephilia, which denotes an erotic preference for "pubescent children," was suggested by Blanchard and his team for inclusion in the DSM-5 (Blanchard et al., 2009). Four years later, the APA's Board of Trustees opted for the status quo and rejected that proposal. This essay sheds light on the reason for this rejection. I consider three important questions related to hebephilia: Does hebephilia exist? Is it a disease? And what would have been the social consequences of including it in the DSM? I argue that if Blanchard failed to convince others that hebephilia should be included in the DSM-5, it is not because he focused too much on the first question and was unable to offer a convincing answer to the second one, but because he made the mistake of dismissing the third one as extraneous. The DSM is not intended to be a pure research manual, and a category like hebephilia cannot be evaluated without taking into account its potential forensic impact. In part or in whole, the decision to include a new diagnostic category in the DSM is, and always should be, a political decision.