This file contains definitions for various notions. Of course, these are only suggestions - language is anarchy, you are free to use the words differently.
Description:That means, it is not a person with actual or previous sexual relations with children. Thus, if a person is pedophile may be established only by the person itself, not by their behaviour.
There may be other persons (sadists, persons with fear of contact with adults, persons in a situation without the preferred sexual partner) which have sexual contacts with children but are not pedophile.
There may be also pedophiles which have even never touched a child for different reasons (fear of persecution, fear of contact, no possibility of contact).
It seems necessary to have a neutral notion for people which have had some pedosexual contact, independent on their sexual orientation. Which? Offender may be used for a person which violates some AOC laws and seems to be too emotional.
Description: Objective harm caused by repression of the society is excluded. Thus, black people in a racist society are not sick.
Description:
The definition is independend of gender.
Following this definition, there may be ephebophiles which have never touched any boy/girl, and non-ephebophiles with many pedosexual relations. It is not the behaviour, but the feelings which defines the ephebophile.
For persons attracted by preadolescent children use the notion pedophile.
Child is used here as any person considered as not completely adult.
Description:
That means, sexual relations between children without any adults are included, independend of the number of the involved persons (at least two) and their gender.
Purely platonic relations are not considered as pedosexual.
The notion child depends on the age-of-consent laws of the country (upper border from 12 to 21).
The idea is to have a single notion which contains all sexual relations of interest.
A sexual relation so that every involved person consents at any moment with any applied sexual technique.
Description:
This does not imply that the involved persons have the mental ability to give informed consent.
That means, in the sense of the definition even a baby can consent or not to the sexual relations simply by smiling or whining - an obviously not informed consent.
Description: This word often will be used to describe as unwanted, as consensual pedosexual relations. Thus, to use this notion can lead to misunderstanding.
The notion non-consensual relation seems to be more accurate, because it avoids this misunderstanding. But sexual abuse is much more common, and if it will be used to describe non-consensual, unwanted sexual contacts, it seems correct.
To describe as consensual, as non-consensul contacts, use the more neutral notion pedosexual relation.
If you use sexual abuse also for consensual contacts, this will be considered by some people as flame.