[#93803] Re: Re: It's not as if this type of

Michael, I am in support of the need for more studies of the genetic and environmental factors that might be related and correlated to the development of pedophilia and its expression as child molestation. What I am questioning is the viability of even considering a smile or 'pedosmile' as being a significant identifiable factor and I find it difficult to understand how any scientific study can either confirm or disprove the notion of a pedosmile existing in its own right, as is being proposed as a possibility by Natalie and the websites that she has linked to. 
In this article Natalie says the following about the hypothetical existence and use of the pedosmile  :- 

The website claims that a person who is a pedophile can be spotted by looking for the “pedosmile” The pedosmile is widely recognized in our society and has even been defined in the “urban dictionary” The original website for the pedosmile includes a series of images of both pedophiles and non-pedophiles and asks the reader to guess which ones are which. The website’s owner is rather full of himself but, I have to admit I am wondering if he is on to something.

He is on to something, how?

why do I think the “pedosmile” might be important? Active pedophiles, or child molesters as I prefer to call them to distinguish them from those pedophiles who do not sexually assault children, are a rarely studied criminal type about which we know little or nothing. We are not very good at spotting them before they do terrible damage….By the same token, our society’s near hysterical fear of child molesters, means innocent people have been damaged by the mere accusation of being one. Exploring the pedosmile and its implications might improve that sorry situation.

Really, how can exploring the pedosmile improve that sorry situation?

Therefore, one possibility is that the “pedosmile” does exist and if it does it indicates that pedophilia has a purely genetic basis…And so maladaptive genes, or more likely genetic predispositions to maladaptive behaviours such as pedophilia, will be much more common in males than females simply because in females they are recessive and are therefore hidden. 

How does the possible existence of a pedosmile indicate that pedophilia has a purely genetic basis?

Perhaps one symptom of this is the pedosmile. if there is a “pedosmile”, it may be due not to some gene for pedophilia but rather to some environmental insult that occurred before birth…If we knew that, we could potentially educate women to avoid this insult in pregnancy and possibly come up with some way to treat the damage.

How does the symptom of a pedosmile now indicate that an environmental insult has occurred?

 It may be that the pedosmile, if it exists, is simply a useful disguise child molesters employ that they learned works, consciously or unconsciously, by simple trial and error. 

How could the pedosmile's existence as a useful disguise possibly be scientifically tested for and proven?

Using school pictures, do a large retrospective analysis of convicted pedophiles from school age to adult compared with an appropriately matched control sample looking for evidence of the pedosmile. Facial recognition software should aid in that endeavor. If the pedosmile is present in childhood and predictive of pedophile offenses, then intense research should be undertaken to understand the biological, social and environmental inputs in its creation. Simultaneously, the pedosmile could be used to test therapies useful in treating younger adults otherwise destined to become child molesters.

How could the 'pedosmile' possibly be scientifically proved to be present in childhood and predictive of pedophile offences or be used to test therapies? I personally can't even get my head around the logistics of what Natalie is proposing here. At the end of the day all of this proposed scientific study revolves around the existence of a hypothetical pedosmile and how on earth can this possibly be scientifically distinguished from any other unusual smile? Wouldn't it be better to just study pedophilia in general and not confuse the issue with this hypothetical 'pedosmile' factor?