The Demise of Pedophilia Chic

There’s hardly a more disquieting and grotesque topic than pedophilia, but, as Mary Eberstadt reveals in her essay on “ pedophilia chic ,” it has not always been given the condemnation it deserves, even—as it were—in America.

Present unanimous disapproval comes from the political right and left—so much so that in the thick of the Polanski scandal, “The New York Times and the Washington Post . . . untrue to form, found themselves editorializing about the case in phrases that the Washington Times or the Catholic League could have reprinted verbatim.” Interestingly, both conservatives and liberals arrive at their condemnation of pedophilia through moral reasoning—though liberals, on nearly every other matter of sexual morality, allow only pragmatic considerations in public discussion.

But as late as the 1990s, this unanimity could hardly have been predicted, as a sizable cadre of “enlightened folk” were still wondering whether “intergenerational sex . . . might be worth a cheer or two.” Perhaps current disgust for this attitude is motivated by guilt, as the “enlightened” view of child abuse was entertained by more than a few opinion-machines of the likes of The Nation , New Republic , Vanity Fair , and the American Psychological Association.

Interestingly, Eberstadt identifies this decade’s abuse scandal among priests—or, perhaps, the coverage of it—as a watershed moment for our attitude towards the vice. Not only did the scandals do away with all vestiges of benignity pedophilia retained, but they made the public acutely aware of the lasting harm sexual abuse causes. And while the scandals gave professed enemies of the Church a motive for claiming a moral high ground, “the Church’s harshest critics are, generally speaking, the same sort of enlightened folks from whom pedophilia chic had floated up.” So the libertine view of “pedophilia chic” and hating on the Church were no longer compatible.

While the problem of pedophilia has not gone away, we can take consolation in Eberstadt’s assurance that this grave wrong “remains a marker of right and wrong in a world where other markers have been erased.”

Dear Reader,

Can I be direct with you?

War abroad. Socialists on the rise. AI upending human life. Endless uproar online. The modern attention economy doesn’t want readers — it wants users enslaved to the tyranny of the present.

First Things is the antidote: literary excellence, timeless truths, and a fixed point of reference in a culture that has lost its bearings.

But we can’t do it without readers like you.

Our goal: Raise $150,000 by November 1 to sustain First Things in the year ahead.


Your gift anchors readers in the permanent things.

Make your Fall Campaign gift now using the button below.

GIVE NOW

If you have any questions or would like more information, please contact Giovanni Del Piero, Director of the Editor’s Circle, at gdelpiero@firstthings.com or 212-627-1985.

Next
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE

The Church in the Age of Therapy

Matthew Loftus

In 1966, Philip Rieff wrote in The Triumph of the Therapeutic that “Religious man was born to…

Canada’s Deadliest Blind Spot

Anna Farrow

On September 20, the Daily Mail ran a story with the provocative headline, “Our 83-year-old Christian grandmother…

The Faithful Joy of Dolly Parton and Fulton Sheen

Mike Aquilina

Dolly Parton and Fulton Sheen seem to have had little in common. She favored rhinestones; he wore…