Stop pedophile bashing today!

[elsiecow]

<br>Is this a joke?<br><br>Pedophilia in itself is not illegal, although it may be de facto illegal. Yes, there are witch hunts in which people are falsely smeared as pedophiles or child molesters or both. If you really want to get someone good, all you have to do is smear them as a "pedophile".<br><br>Does that make pedophilia right, however? Does the fact that it is legal to have an obsession make obsession okay?<br><br>Pedophilia in its pure definition means "attraction to children". It doesn't necessarily mean you're a "child molester". So okay, pedophiles have rights.<br><br>But does that absolve us of any social responsibility with regard to pedophiles?<br><br>Let's say a hypothetical pedophile has never laid a hand on any child, yet harbors an obsession with children. Do you think that obsession never impacts the targets of his obsession?<br><br>Having been the target of obsessives myself, I think not. It lays the groundwork for victimization. It sets the stage for someone else to come along and actually do injury to the target. What's more, the obsessives know this is true, but they tell themselves that since they themselves did not lay a hand on the victim, they are not guilty.<br><br>Do you know what pedophiles do? They exchange pictures of children - naked or otherwise. If anything happens or has happened to any of these children, and they do not cooperate in the investigation, then they are in fact guilty of being an accessory.<br><br>Private obsessions always have a way of impacting the public.<br><br>If there's one thing I've learned from my time in the work force, it's that your personal torments and obsessions do impact those around you, even if you think you've done a good job of keeping things to yourself.<br><br>Pedophiles claim they just want an 'innocent', loving, 'sexual' (ew) relationship with a young girl or boy. The problem is that most young girls or boys would not reciprocate consensually. The pedophile is therefore, at the very least, choosing to live in a fantasy world. Fantasy worlds can become like a drug, and things can escalate from there.<br><br>Therefore any sort of obsession IS a greater social problem, even if the obsessor thinks his obsession is confined to his private life.<br><br> <p></p><i></i>

[mother]

Basic common sense would prohibit knowingly surrendering one's child to someone who has "desires" for a chlid yet bravely resists the impulse. Just as any boss would be wiser to fire someone who wants to kill him. Attitude affects judgement. Who can claim that what is in his/her heart does not affect impressionable children. They're little mind-reading barometers, who rightfully crave love and attention. Decieve yourself all you like, Z, you've got support in high places... <p></p><i></i>

[elsiecow]

<br>You are exactly right.<br><br>Children know when people have an unhealthy obsession with them. And one's obsession always gives them away, and if not reined in, can become destructive.<br><br>That doesn't mean that people with a sexual obsession should be jailed for thought crime - it simply means that it needs to be identified as a social problem and society needs to take collective responsibility for it somehow.<br><br>Regardless, trading pictures of children without their consent or their parents' consent is or should be illegal, no?<br><br>And then there are all of the creeps who gather on websites and talk in code. They even threaten people in code, thinking that will cover their ass if anything happens to their target. This is how it really works on the 'net. Then, when these people get busted, they will screech and howl and say you're persecuting them for 'thought crime' and everything else, but the fact is that they are guilty of withholding knowledge of a crime.<br><br> <p></p><i></i>

[jenz]

some people defend people who rape torture and kill children by diverting the question to the meaning of "paedophile", some people do same by diverting the argument to the meaning of "ritual", in ritual abuse. its not the only tactic, but its well worn. If anglophiles regularly expressed their love of the English by the same means that paedophiles express their "love" of children, ZH, that too would be a dirty word. <p></p><i></i>

[Peachtree Pam]

You said<br><br><br>[holy crap, it really IS a full moon tonight! I guess that's why people on here have been weird today]<br><br>The only weird person on this thread is you by posting this repulsive link.... <br> <p></p><i></i>

[RollickHooper]

elsiecow and jenz made two very good points:<br><br>the literal meaning of a word and how the word comes to be used within our culture are (often) two different things--eg the word "homophobia" means, literally, fear of one's own kind.<br><br>I've said this so often I should use it as an auto-signature feature-thing:<br><br>COMPULSIVE BEHAVIOR IS NOT A LEGITIMATE LIFESTYLE CHOICE.<br><br>RollickHooper--formerly known as enkidu <p></p><i></i>

[Dreams End]

I don't know how we can judge what goes on in someone else's head. We have age of consent laws because younger people are at a disadvantage. Not only do they lack maturity and decision making skills and the skills to protect themselves emotionally and physically, they are also unequal in power status to adults...there's simply no way to avoid coercion in such unequal relationships. Even adult relationships have this...therapist to patient, teacher to student. <br><br>There's nothing magic about 18, as people mature differently, but 18 is the age at which, legally anyway, young people gain more equal footing with the adult world. Hopefully, they've developed enough maturity and lifeskills throughout adolescence to cope with sexual relatinships.<br><br>So, while we cannot judge what is in someone's head, we can set some rules and agree to abide by them. It's not perfect, but nothing is. <p></p><i></i>

[ARV]

Has anyone thought that maybe we can genetically weed out this abberation(through testing and brain scans) and place all the currently existing pedophiles into a confined area away from the rest of civilized population. <br><br>Then, ideally we can begin genetic birth control treatment so that we can eliminate them from ever being created. Science can solve this problem--nobody will miss them. <p></p><i></i>

[robertdreed]

The decision to make 18 the age of consent is definitely the choice of a minority of countries. Most of them are more like 16. And, as I've pointed out before, the age of consent in Canada is 14. <p></p><i></i>

[jenz]

'age of consent' discussion is different to 'don't bash paedophiles'. yes, its culturally conditioned and different countries come to different decisions, but those decisions are defined in law, which is the same for everyone in each country. all agree that children need to be protected. if you try to manipulate consent laws to appease the paedophile lobby, you will end up consent being assumed by a child still attached by the umbilical cord to his/her mother, since that is a matter of practice (as opposed to the propaganda lies this thread began with). keep it simple. <br><br>eugenics - have no faith in scientists to mess with human race in selective breeding, but funnily enough I concur with giving paedophiles their own state and had Nevada picked for it. If they say they don't pass to illegal acts, let them hole up in a suitable desert without kids, a sort of celibate enclave where their fantasies can have free rein, and no child is harmed. <p></p><i></i>

[mother]

but then what if "they" make 14-yr olds consent to go to war? Or sign up for some nefarious homeland security assignment? Once the age of adulthood is legally defined, or the boundaries sufficiently blurred, who can possibly trust "them" with our children? <p></p><i></i>

[Peachtree Pam]

Mother,<br><br>Great post.<br><br>Or a candidate for "special forces", or experiments in MK Ultra. <p></p><i></i>

[proldic]

Quoting ARV: <br>Has anyone thought that maybe we can genetically weed out this abberation(through testing and brain scans) and place all the currently existing pedophiles into a confined area away from the rest of civilized population...Then, ideally we can begin genetic birth control treatment so that we can eliminate them from ever being created. Science can solve this problem--nobody will miss them. <br>End quote<br><br>XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX<br><br>I just wanted to say some things w/o too much editing or second thought. <br><br>First, I'm assuming that ARV was being subtly sarcastic here. Maybe he/she is trying to make a (valid) point w/o being pilloried as a "defender of child molesters". Maybe their point was about the way that pedophile "hysteria" (oh - everyone check out that word origin for further understanding of this issue), in combination with other responses to -- perceived -- "attacks" against our (western) -- perceived -- "standard/quality of living" in the general population, such as serial killers, drug wars, and postmodernism (hee hee) can/are used to bring about key aspects of the NWO clampdown. <br><br>There is a case in Texas that is informative in this light. During a time of public opposition to prison building, (I believe) the authorities purposefully released a total predatory psycho over traffic violators and low-level drug offenders, to provoke a public fear-control reaction, which led to opinion being swayed away from alternatives to incarceration for low-level drug offenders, and back to a multi-million dollar wave of expansion of the PIC in Texas at the time. <br> <br>This goes back a long way before that though, I'm sure. It's an old manipulation of basic and good human instincts, and now we are being kept purposefully off-kilter, confused about values, in a state of "perpetual dissonance", and also victims of the backlash caused by that insecurity. <br><br>It's "fait acompli" (sp?) all the time.<br><br>What a tough (Hegelian) nut, because, the capitalist system purposefully "creates" the conditions that lead to what is a very real and widespread epidemic of crimes against children (not even talking about "elite" involvment per se here).<br><br>But they also benefit from the public's reaction through acceptance of - actually DEMAND for - fascist regulation, like swabbing, total community databases, indefinite detainment, tracking, psycho-medical control, preventitive eugenics, and sterilization.<br><br>On top of that the "elites" that I believe are "psychicly driving" this phenomonem, get away with it almost completely, where your average perp in the cases highlighted by the media are generally without power.<br><br>Also, I'm certain that these charges will be and have been used to smear, then when they go to jail, essentially kill, opponents of the system who are completely innocent. How do we prevent against that?<br><br>Going back full circle, however, we must also be careful to not knee-jerk assume that someone "on our side" has been smeared unjustly without understanding the truth of the case (Daniel Ortega and Scott Ritter come to mind here -and I think looking into their cases, something I haven't done extensively, might reveal something). Remember how many folks believe that the leadership on "our side" is largely corrupted anyway, and the system tends to covertly promote/eliminate the opponents of the worst kind of "leaders" on "our side", "planting" people who will later be set up or are self-discrediting. Either way, we're in a deep hole. But it seems to me to be essential for us to collectively reason ourselves out of it though. If not for ourselves, than "for the children", at least. <br> <br>Since the term "witch hunt" is often used by defenders to describe these pedophilia investigations, I wonder if it's worth reflecting on any parallels to the witch trials in political terms. How public emotions were used to ensnare many people unjustly, but at the core there may have been more real heresy going on than is commonly believed. Maybe the people who were burned at the stake were scapegoats, or peripheral figures at best? And the real occult leaders got away. And that's not even entertaining the idea I read here that the whole community was engaged in some giant occult sacrifice, and the people burned were burned by the witches, not the other way around. <br><br>Maybe it's significant what I remember reading somewhere about how Walt Disney, who it has been argued is possibly one of the top crypto-occult fascist programmers in American history, was directly descended from the MAN accused of (but not burned for) being the "head witch" in Salem? <br><br>Anyway, to me it's all terrorism, pure and simple. False flag and real. So the question is, which is the more real or significant one? Maybe it's worth looking at the way we think of that in this frame as well? Is A-Q "real"? Is Islamic terror a completely rigged false-flag operation run by Mossad et al of staged events, fake planes, and "no Arabs on board", or is it a real huge frankenstein monster birthed by Breszinski et al in the mountains, and promoted to be very popular in the Muslim world, which crashed those planes on 9/11 (more heavily-assisted LIHOP than direct MIHOP). Or more likely in all these cases it's a combo of the two, but the key question to me is which one is more factually determinable, socially powerful/"combustible". <br><br>On the unlikely chance that ARV is NOT being sarcastic: That is false hope if I've ever seen it. Even if they were/are able to identify a specific trait that predisposes a certain small number of people to have the tendency to harm children, I'm sure that the majority of those crimes are committed by people who would not fit into that group. <br><br>Intuitively, I know that the test would just be used by the system to arbitrarily label dissidents as possible pedophiles, while "clearing" others who are really a danger, allowing them to assume positions working w/ kids etc. "Normal" people, so to speak. Unless you think that the scientists down at the HGP are somehow pure and untainted by politics, and don't reflect the bias of their mentors, funders, and their own backgrounds? <br>If anything at all, we need a genetic test to weed out those citizens predisposed to blindly trusting authority. <br><br>It is by far the conditions/expectations of society, and specifically the government, that limits or encourages "evil", and either supresses or conjures people's darker, or animalistic tendencies, and blurs the lines of distinction between "right" and "wrong". <br><br>Check out zero's original post, or the one about the Sundance judges (certainly sub-elites at least) choosing 6 films this year that "challenge" the public to deal with "child sexuality", or the celebration of the academic push to mainstream pedophilia, embodied in films like "Kinsey", and books like "The Politics of Child Abuse" and that other new book that just came out that I can't remeber the title of right now. <br><br>Or look at "modern" Canada. The age of consent in Canada is so low, and in their cities exists a worldwide hub for financing child porn and exploitation, and the home base of a lot of these shadowy orgs, and also vast rural areas have had long-standing and undeniable traditions of inscest. If it wasn't for that "arbitrary" age, they'd have to be prosecuting a whole lot of pedophiles up there. See what I mean about how government sets the table that we are dining at? <br><br>It is in our interest to start compiling the evidence of what I see as a purposeful -- fascist -- attempt to debase and "primitivize" this society, not just with the effects of "perpetual war", but also actually an element that is composed of popularizing the darkest things like pedophilia, canabilism, and bestiality. Remember how the child murderer de Sade was romanticized just a few years back? <br><br>I even remember a poster in another discussion recently "advocating"/"accepting" a "sexual revolution" that would include legalizing animal-human "relations". <br><br>Btw, what's the "age of consent" for a dog? <br><br> <p></p><i></i>

[jenz]

I was tongue in cheek in my Nevada scenario also, but not to highlight the 'over-reaction' problem. I think that actually paedophilia is being used for , amongst other things, smearing and implicating, and that the small fry are thrown to the dogs while the main players laze on the beach -(sorry about mixed metaphors) . but the huge problem is not innocents being charged, but guilty knowing they will virtually certainly never be charged. not because the laws are not draconian enough, but because the laws are not enforced. So we have to patiently or not so patiently insist that they are enforced, and resist at all times the propaganda. and yes I think 14 is too low an age of consent in the modern world, but its a different debate, and one which (possibly) seems to be less tied in to the manipulation of our society away from democracy, than the insidious attacks on human values and common sense represented by the pro paedophile lobby. <p></p><i></i>

[ARV]

That is why I propose making the state of being a pedophile into a crime. We can and should sterilize both male and female members of this population as well. <br><br>All of them from the top down should be confined to a separate place and we can use biometric monitoring devices to keep them in place. The US government was thinking of doing something like this for endagered animals in the midwest(<!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20050818/sc_afp/eastafricausscience_050818172543).">news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=...18172543).</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--> Children who carry the genetic traits of pedophilia should be kept in individual isolation until they become adults.<br><br>If we spent a fraction of what we spend in Iraq trying to eliminate these undesirables, we may rid the world of them within a couple decades. <p></p><i></i>