“To be really clear about this — I conducted the wedding and would do so again next week. So this is not one of those things where I wish I hadn’t done that.” Douglas Wilson
“So do you think that someone who believes such behavior to be normal should be an arbiter of normal?”
Douglas Wilson
A recent memo from serial pedophile Steven Sitler’s probation officer to Judge Stegner revealed three facts1 hitherto unknown by the general public:
- Steven Sitler currently has seven state-approved chaperones and five more have applied for the position, which makes a total of 13.
- “Mr. Sitler was directed by IDOC to live outside of his residence until further notice due to the issues involving his deviant sexual fantasies regarding the infant.”
- Sitler was diagnosed “as a fixated pedophile in 2005 who ‘under no circumstances should be allowed to be around children unsupervised’.”
We never knew how many chaperones the state approved to watch Sitler. Now we know he has 7 and they want 13. It appears that Sitler’s advocates will press the court to restore the serial child molester to the home where he fathered a son.
Most people assumed that the Idaho Department of Correction banned Sitler from his home because of problems related to his newborn son, but the IDOC couched it as “the heinous nature of these violations” without further specificity. Now we know Sitler entertains “deviant sexual fantasies regarding the infant.”
Everyone knew Steven Sitler is a pedophile. But no one knew that ten years ago experts diagnosed him as a “fixated pedophile,” which is significant.
The following excerpt (including the table) explains the meaning of “fixated pedophile.” It is taken from a paper entitled “Child Sexual Abuse: A Review of the Literature” by The John Jay College Research Team:
* * *
The fixated offender is characterized as having a persistent, continual and compulsive attraction to children. They are usually diagnosed with pedophilia, or recurrent, intense, sexually arousing fantasies of at least six months in duration involving pre-pubescent children (American Psychiatric Association, 1999). Finkelhor (1984) classifies these offenders as exclusively involved with children and points out that they are usually not related to their victims and are attracted to children from adolescence. According to Holmes and Holmes (2002), the offender has not fully developed and shows characteristics of a child. In particular, fixated offenders do not develop past the point where they find children attractive and desirable. The fixated offender’s actions are typically premeditated in nature and do not result from any perceived stress. In addition, this type of offender is often unable to attain any degree of psychosexual maturity and, during adulthood, has had virtually no age-appropriate sexual relationships. The fixated offender is more likely to choose victims who are male and not related to him (Abel and Rouleau, 1990; Simon et al., 1992; West, 1987).
It is the fixated offenders who are most dangerous to society, constituting “a public health problem” (Abel, Lawry, Kalstrom et al., 1994) as well as a “criminal problem” (Freeman-Longo, 1996). These offenders develop relationships with vulnerable children (vulnerable in either an emotional or situational sense), and they typically recruit, groom and maintain the children for a continuing sexual relationship (Conte, 1991). The offenders delude themselves into believing they have established a caring, supportive role with the child and that the child is able to derive pleasure and educational experience from the interaction (Abel and Rouleau, 1995; Marshall and Barbaree, 1990b).
Fixated offenders are particularly dangerous because their offenses often go unreported, and subsequently, many have been convicted of far fewer offenses than they actually committed (Abel and Rouleau, 1990; Abel et al., 1994; Elliot, Browne and Kilcoyne, 1995). Offenders who abuse young boys are at the highest risk of recidivating and are also likely to commit the most offenses (Marques, Day, et al., 1994; Marques, Nelson et al., 1994). Abel and Rouleau’s (1990) study of 561 male offenders who voluntarily sought treatment showed that the non-incestuous offenders in the sample who assaulted young boys averaged 281 offenses with an average of 150 victims. It is the strongly fixated offenders who have the most victims and the highest rate of recidivism and should consequently be considered the highest risk to the community. (Child Sexual Abuse: A Review of the Literature, page 24)
FIXATED PEDOPHILE
| MOTIVATION | PRIMARY VICTIM PREFERENCE | RISK OF REOFFENDING |
|
|
|
* * *
Steven Sitler’s first & only choice for a sex partner is a child — preferable a young boy. This is his fixation, or his sexual orientation, and this is the reason the state banned him from living in his home. He has an innate and uncontrollable desire to molest his son. He is delusional. He believes his child would enjoy the physical contact. Therefore he requires at least one chaperone to watch him at all times whenever he’s near his child — 24 seven — until his son grows up, because without a chaperone Sitler would act on his perverted impulses. Sitler’s mental disorder is so severe that the court and his counselors declared that he “under no circumstances should be allowed to be around children unsupervised.”
Pastor Douglas Wilson of Christ Church, Moscow, created this pedophiliac-centered home when he wedded the serial molester to the graduate of New Saint Andrews College and prayed for the young couple to have children. Mr. Wilson appears oblivious to the ramifications of Sitler’s “deviant sexual fantasies regarding the infant” and he appears equally unconcerned that Sitler requires an army of chaperones to protect the child from his father’s sexual predations. Further, Mr. Wilson has no problem with the Sitler’s living conditions — he said he would perform the ceremony again. Next week. And despite these facts, Mr. Wilson defends the “sexual outlook of Christ Church” and the Kirk’s “sexual ethics.”
Doug Wilson is fixated. He shows no ability to discern right from wrong in this matter and he has asserted his resolve to do wrong. His actions have created two more victims in this fiasco — Katie Sitler and her baby. And his moral lapse raises the same question that he posed vis-à-vis Natalie in his strawman defense of the abusive ad hominem: “Do you think that someone who believes such behavior to be normal should be an arbiter of normal?”
Of course not.
1 We learned several new things from this memo but these three stand out.
I recently read a blog entry that would have been useful to Doug Wilson if he had incorporated the values described into his conscience when he was eight years old. Sadly, he did not. Perhaps that is why he refuses to acknowledge his role in the disgusting marriage of Katie and Steven Sitler. We can also throw Ed Iverson, the putrid Cupid in this relationship, who is the former librarian at New Saint Andrews college and “minister” (only in the Communion of Reformed Evangelical Churches would he be permitted to claim that title) in this decaying mess. We can’t forget Katie Sitler’s parents, and certainly the willfully blind and pathetically stupid Roxanne and Dave Sitler into the same roiling pot of self-justification and denial which contaminates everything about this marriage. The following is an excerpt from the blog cited above that is particularly descriptive of all enabling parties.
Rose Huskey