This is a sensitive topic, about as politically incorrect as you can get these days. I am perhaps as hesitant to wade into these waters as
Atticus Finch was to defend a black man. None the less, I will do so with the assumption that the
majority of readers here have the maturity to understant that correcting misconceptions about criminal behavior is NOT the same thing as endorsing or defending that behavior. Further, I am NOT an expert by any means. I have read a fair amount about it (my wife was sexually abused by her step-father and I kind of oped it would help me understand her a bit better).
Anyway, that was a LONG preface so I will move along...
A pedophile is someone sexually attracted to pre-pubescent children, typically 13 and under, though there numerous sub-classifications in popular culture and perhaps the medical community that cover the entire range of sub-legal age brackets.
The majority of pedophiles (of all flavors) are NOT excited by the idea of violence against children (or anyone else). Of the small percentage of pedophiles who act upon their urges, even here we find that very few act in a way intended to physically injure the child -- with the stipulation that ANY sexual contact with a child is both emotionally and physically damaging to that child. However, and this is a key point, this class of sexual predator, this
"normal" pedophile did not TRY to hurt the child. It was not his or her motivation.
"
Pedophiles are not generally violent, unless you are using the term sexual violence against children in a moral, rather than a literal, way. Its perpetrators very rarely use force or cause physical injury in a youngster... Bringing themselves down to the maturity level of children rather than trying to drag the child up toward an adult level, many men who engage in sex with children tend toward kissing, mutual masturbation, or "hands-off" encounters such as voyeurism and exhibitionism."
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=126179&page=3
Essentially... in their own insane way they like the kid, and in the exact same way that a normal adult likes whoever he is attracted to. And just as the normal guy does not even contemplate violently raping his date, this class of pedophile is repulsed by the idea of violently raping a child.
But...
But there are some men (and to a less extent women) who are rapists. And while we label ANY sexual contact between an adult and child as at least statuatory rape, there is a world of difference between statuatory rape and violent rape, both in terms of motivation and outcomes.
Rape is not directly about sex. It is about violence and power. The rapist is excited by the terror, turned on by the tears. And while some have a preferred target type, many do not. They will rape anyone, regardless of age (grandma or toddler, they don't care) and even regardless of sex. Yes, men rape other men too, far more often then one might think. Rape is a VERY underreported crime (almost 60% of ALL rapes go unreported) of those reported about 9% are male victims. It is safe to assume that the actual number is higher.
But this case, assuming an actual crime took place at all, and assuming that it was sexual in nature, it was likely a murder. Or, in any case, that was the suggestion I was responding to.
"
After the latter half of the 1980's, the percentage of all murders with known circumstances in which investigators identified rape or another sex offense as the principal circumstance of the murder has declined from about 2% of murders to less than 1%."
http://www.mincava.umn.edu/documents/sexoff/sexoff.html
In other words, even violent rapists rarely murder their victims. Again, even violent rapists who are trying to brutalise and torture, rarely kill their victims.
Which brings me back around to the post you quoted.
You basically asked what motivates a child predator if not physically injuring or killing his victim. The problem here is termonolgy --
every Pedophile (every sex criminal actually) is labelled by the media and popular culture as a predator, it's a scary word, it suggests stalking and hunting and killing. In this case the word, scary as it may be, is not necessarily an accurate predictor of what the perpetrator wants to do.
The questions we should ask, before accusing or even suggesting that Celina's "brother" raped and killed her is this: is there any evidence to suggest that he was attracted to young girls? Is there any evidence that he was violent? Is there any evidence that he is or was a rapist? If the answer to the above questions is no, then any scenario which casually assumes these things is not only unlikely, but completely unfair to a guy who deserves the presumption of innocence and is, so far as the evidence shows so far, a victim.
