Do I want to follow the link to that alleged study?

The only way you could arrive at that conclusion would be if you 1. cheated or 2. defined "empathy" as "willingness to let children eat sweets all day long" ... actually, the second one IS cheating, so ... yeah, just cheating.

(Or of course, this person just lies about what the study says. TRAs do that all the time, so ...)

Child molesters have always tried to portray themselves as friends of children, citing all kinds of things they want to do for children that would sound appealing to innocent children and very stupid adults (the same rights adults have! Isn't that cool?) but which are not good for children (... especially the "right" to "consent" to sex with adults...)

Here's the study:

The results indicate evidence for higher general affective empathic resonance to children in pedophilic men but superior cognitive empathy abilities in nonoffending pedophiles only, which may act as a protective factor in the prevention of sexual offending.


I can' t read the article now, but I would love to know the objective way in which they have proven that these "non-offending" pedophiles are more empathetic towards children.

Like... what did they do, asked these pedophiles if they cared about children, they said yes, and they trusted their words? I am sure they weren' t lying in the least. πŸ™„

I am also curious about the fact that this alleged superior empathy has a role in preventing them from not offending: if it' s such a powerful emotion, why do these people need further help to restrain themselves from committing crimes like all the pro-pedo brigade keeps saying? If they' re so sensitive and caring towards children, isn' t that enough?