Salon Provides Platform for "Non-Practicing" Pedophile

[zangtang]

'“Angels and demons were identical--interchangeable archetypes--all a matter of polarity. The guardian angel who conquered your enemy in battle was perceived by your enemy as a demon destroyer.”
― Dan Brown, The Lost Symbol

dangerous to quote dan brown - people might think you read that shit!

[Iamwhomiam]

No, not really. More like one, (Demonic) being an electron that has lost its charge, in that something that once made them all equal is now lacking, imo; the inequality in this case not being a true polarity as Dan Brown sees it. Close, but no cigar.

[tapitsbo]

Hahahaha i wasn't thinking of dan brown, it was definitely a mystic from a few centuries ago

[General Patton]

The OP is standing in the odd intersection where the shallowness of third wave feminism, the problematic edges of identity politics, the facility of social media for the use of shaming as a tool of social control (yes, I can hear my own critics baying at this point), and cooptation of the language of social justice movements converge to create a wickedly effective stealth backlash strategy.

The call to compassion, together with the stick of shaming held high, render the liberal blind to telltale signs of narcissism, and various subtle and not so subtle boundary violations.

Conservatism has embraced liberal identity politics and now puts up only token resistance. It's similar to how arab nations need to talk shit about Israel while simultaneously making deals with them under the table. Wouldn't want to overtly break the kayfabe otherwise social conservatives would stop using the GOP as catharsis. Our old pals at the Buckley rag NRO ran that article chastising Cons for not feeling Christlike compassion for pedophiles. The author is a foreign policy wank and an atheist who, without a hint of irony, feels the need to lecture Cons on Christianity. This is par for the course for the GOP, they have no moral core and so by default they will begrudgingly go along with liberal social experiments while parading nostalgia for Reagan and Buckley. The closest they can get is embracing the "free market" which in practice just means more corporatism in favor of their donors. There are people on the periphery like Ted Cruz, who is a talented demagogic robot that can mimic moral values enough to fool people in both parties that he actually believes what he is saying, but people like Cruz are in the minority. Most conservative leadership are happy to do their time, get paid and cash out before the ship sinks. This is fallout from the destruction of social roles, castes and the atomization of western civilization. When the moral fabric of society is unwoven, it must be rewoven with new norms.

So I contend that if one group of mostly white heterosexual male people can make the world bend to the needs of their paraphilia, I have no doubt that another one can—pedophiles

The ones fighting for it will certainly be mostly white.

[General Patton]

I had thought that they would start with incest and polyandry first, but I suppose they feel the need to go all in while they have their moment in the sun:

http://blogs.new.spectator.co.uk/2015/0 ... bia-to-it/
By Brendan O'Neill
And Britain is truly experiencing a moment of social madness. The Savile scandal has nurtured an ugly climate, where half-baked claims against any old celeb or politician are taken seriously and splashed across the papers, aided and abetted by police forces that have lost the plot and publicity-hungry politicians who stand up in parliament to say ‘I have evidence of a Westminster paedo ring!’ By which they mean some former drug addict phoned them once and claimed to have been tortured by a Tory. In listing the obviously bonkers accusations made against him, Proctor has drawn attention to the Dark Age streak to this hysteria. Good for him. He’s drawn attention to something else too: the anti-gay aspect of the paedo panic.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brendan_O ... rnalist%29
He began his career at Spiked's predecessor, Living Marxism, the journal of the Revolutionary Communist Party,
...
O'Neill has served as a visiting fellow and columnist with the Australian libertarian think-tank, the Centre for Independent Studies,[11] as well as being a keynote speaker for the pro-Israel advocacy organisation StandWithUs

Elite and muslim pedophile rings don't exist, nothing to see here folks. Move along.

Edited to add: Expect them to start running the "Youth Rights" angle soon. They're going to focus on how it's good for the children and gives them more agency even though it's entirely about what adults want. There isn't anywhere near enough pushback on this to slow them down.

[tapitsbo]

The OP is standing in the odd intersection where the shallowness of third wave feminism, the problematic edges of identity politics, the facility of social media for the use of shaming as a tool of social control (yes, I can hear my own critics baying at this point), and cooptation of the language of social justice movements converge to create a wickedly effective stealth backlash strategy.

The call to compassion, together with the stick of shaming held high, render the liberal blind to telltale signs of narcissism, and various subtle and not so subtle boundary violations.

Conservatism has embraced liberal identity politics and now puts up only token resistance. It's similar to how arab nations need to talk shit about Israel while simultaneously making deals with them under the table. Wouldn't want to overtly break the kayfabe otherwise social conservatives would stop using the GOP as catharsis. Our old pals at the Buckley rag NRO ran that article chastising Cons for not feeling Christlike compassion for pedophiles. The author is a foreign policy wank and an atheist who, without a hint of irony, feels the need to lecture Cons on Christianity. This is par for the course for the GOP, they have no moral core and so by default they will begrudgingly go along with liberal social experiments while parading nostalgia for Reagan and Buckley. The closest they can get is embracing the "free market" which in practice just means more corporatism in favor of their donors. There are people on the periphery like Ted Cruz, who is a talented demagogic robot that can mimic moral values enough to fool people in both parties that he actually believes what he is saying, but people like Cruz are in the minority. Most conservative leadership are happy to do their time, get paid and cash out before the ship sinks. This is fallout from the destruction of social roles, castes and the atomization of western civilization. When the moral fabric of society is unwoven, it must be rewoven with new norms.

So I contend that if one group of mostly white heterosexual male people can make the world bend to the needs of their paraphilia, I have no doubt that another one can—pedophiles

The ones fighting for it will certainly be mostly white.

The perpetrators and the resistors both intersect race and gender divisions, for starters

[guruilla]

The thing is that "pedophile" is a misnomer for what is occurring in these organized rings of ritual abuse, torture, rape, and murder of children. They are not pedophiles, they are murderous psychopaths.

It's akin to calling a serial killer a stalker. A serial killer uses stalking, yes, but not every stalker is a serial killer, and, let's face it, mere stalking is relatively benign in comparison to what a serial killer does.

All this muddying the waters means no one can see what's at the bottom of the swamp, and it triggers an undirected feeding frenzy, not just a smoke screen for the real predators to hide behind, but also a means to reframe the entire debate and cry "witch hunt."

[tapitsbo]

Then again, whatever is at the bottom of the swamp, a culture like Britain for most of the 20th Century where sex between children and adults was normalized, albeit in a semi-covert way, doesn't seem to healthy in itself especially for kids. That's just my opinion though...

[guruilla]

I'm going to cross-post this material a) because it seems too relevant to let it be buried in a weirdly-titled thread at which the majority of activity besides my own amounts (IMO) to unconscionable trolling; and b) in the hope of attracting some stronger voices to said thread!

Full post here.

"There is in society a parallel universe that is very close. All of us, whether knowingly or unknowingly, have frequent contact with it. It is populated by individuals who outwardly appear to be respectable, law abiding and not infrequently influential, and even popular members of society. They are found in all professions and they sexually abuse children, some in ways that are almost unimaginably extreme."

Middleton et al Institutional abuse and societal silence: An emerging global problem
http://anp.sagepub.com/content/48/1/22.full

. . . When we penetrate the smokescreen of controversies regarding false accusations, ‘recovered memories’, ‘recanters’, references to ‘satanic ritual abuse’ and the incorporation of elements of cultural myths into some accounts, we are left with the reality that in the vast majority of cases it is not the over-reporting or exaggeration of trauma that is the principal problem. Rather it is society’s unwillingness to know, the perpetrators’ strongly motivated efforts to hide their criminal acts, and the relative ease they are often afforded by societal institutions and practices in doing so.

Society is replete with structures and organizations that have ‘in-house’ arrangements for how matters pertaining to abuse and exploitation are ‘managed’ and covered up. These become channels for perpetrators seeking to avoid accountability. It has generally been the case that women and children have had the least real protection, in that they are particularly vulnerable to sexual abuse, whilst at the same time they are frequently characterized as unreliable or untruthful witnesses as part of the attempt to disguise abuse. Many have commented on the ways in which the sexual exploitation of a child or an adult by an individual in a situation where there is a major power differential brings with it the secrecy, the threats, the manipulation of shame and the need to discredit the victim that so characterize the incest dynamic. Dealing effectively with the major problem of incestuous families, including the substantial number in which incest is ongoing into adulthood, is a major and defining challenge for Australia and for our global community.

The Australian Royal Commission into Institutional Aspects of Child Sexual Abuse can also be conceptualized as representing a sort of ‘proxy’ investigation at two other levels. In the first instance, it is an investigation of child sexual abuse associated with institutions. While the majority of child sexual abuse occurs in families rather than in large collective institutions, the dynamics are frequently so similar that what is found with respect to ‘macro’ institutions parallels the sorts of incest dynamics endlessly seen in families. While an investigation into institutional abuses and the mechanisms that operate to protect abusers will not identify those who abuse children in family contexts, it will, if conducted properly, bring to light some intra-familial abuse. This is because there are many examples of incestuous abuse which merge with elements of organized abuse. A national inquiry into institutional abuse and its cover-up is a necessary major first step for a society that is finally grappling with the true extent of intra-familial abuse.

The second ‘proxy’ element to the Australian Royal Commission is that the sorts of institutional child sexual abuse in Australia are, we suspect, generally similar to those in many other countries. If done well, the Royal Commission’s findings in Australia may be more broadly applicable to many societies that, for a variety of reasons, have thus far baulked at establishing similar investigations in their own countries. A well-conducted and internationally supported Australian Royal Commission will provide politicians, mental health professionals, international trauma societies and national consumer organizations with compelling leverage to assist in addressing both local and international abuse.

All contemporary societies face broadly similar challenges as we awaken to the reality that widespread sexual abuse of children is an issue that has enormous societal, no less than individual, costs. While confronting to contemplate, serial paedophile abusers responsible for the abuse of many hundreds of children arguably cause more deaths and more pain than do some serial killers. Yet many child sexual abusers have managed to repeatedly offend for decades under the protective embrace of organizations that effectively sponsor their opportunities for such activities.

With the advent of the Royal Commission, Australia has a once-in-a-generation opportunity to do something of importance that stretches beyond the needs of Australians. It could come to represent an enduring global benchmark for addressing a deeply troubling aspect of humanity that is as old as civilization. In so doing, it would add a further dimension to the spectrum of basic human rights considerations. It would help spread the reach of true democracy to many who have experienced little protection from existing societal structures in respect to the hierarchical oppressors who have ruled and/or badly damaged their lives.

Propelled by accumulating evidence of sexual abuse of children by mainstream social institutions, and to extend Herman’s (1992) stages of focused public awareness, perhaps the Australian Royal Commission represents a fourth historical moment. This is one in which the populace, now digitally connected in a manner hitherto impossible, is informed by decades of trauma research that will allow comprehensive and systematic examination of the sexual abuse perpetrated on children by the very institutions that are charged with their protection.

The Australian Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse
http://anp.sagepub.com/content/48/1/17.full

[Jerky]

I find it terribly ironic that Guru, who claims to be so concerned about he welfare of children, is blind to the very serious and very real potential damage to the cause of protecting children from REAL predatory and sexual threats that can and is being caused by the spreading of patently ridiculous moral panic fabrications such as the Hampstead Hoax case, which was obviously concocted whole cloth by the REAL abusers in this case, Abraham Christie (who threatened to BURY THE CHILDREN ALIVE if they didn't do as he commanded) and the (IMO) dangerously psychotic runaway fugitive Ella Draper.

Of course, to people like Guru, the fact that Rick Dearman stayed and faced the authorities despite the insanely heinous accusations made against him while Ella and Abraham fled the country is simply proof positive that the courts, the police, and everyone else (except for a few brave super-genius self-declared "Champions of the Children" like Belinda MacKenzie, Neelu Beery, and an assorted menagerie of Sovereign Citizen activists and other finger-sniffing freakazoids who enjoy gathering at church and school entrances and hounding elderly parishioners and terrified parents with screaming accusations that they're baby-fucking, baby-eating baby-killers) is a member of the cult.

Makes sense, right?

But no... I'M the unconscionable troll in all this. Simply because I refuse to buy into the twisted fantasy that seems to have consumed him whole.

J

[Iamwhomiam]

Would any be surprised that the police may be promoting only the more outlandish of the allegations, rather then the more easily proven, credible allegations?

I have no doubt that there are those in engage in the most heinous of behaviours toward all living creatures, including what you or I would call crimes of tortuous acts of cruelty to children and infants. (I so wanted to write "unimaginable horrors," but I don't want anyone imagining anything of the sort.) As you know, we have recipients of such tortures contributing here.

While some will readily accept child sexual abuse, perhaps they "know" of such 'happening' to so and so, or someone even far more removed, they "heard" about such happening in a neighboring town - "It was on the tele." The more dark stuff is simply beyond their comprehension - too horrible to be "real," and therefore necessarily discounted as "unreal."

I've read little about the case Jerky and guruilla are arguing, but I've been following the discussion. I won't watch the video. Just like my not wanting to view images of what war does to babies and everyone else, even reading about traumatized victims haunts me. Horrible things stay with you long after reading or viewing or experiencing. I cannot imagine the pains survivors deal with daily - it is beyond my experience. So it's sad to see two go at like you two, especially sad because it's this thread. You've both engaged in "shaming" each other you say because you have a difference of opinion, but that's a piss poor rationale for treating each other they way you have, and that behaviour is used by child abusers to exert power over their victims. Please reengage more mindfully.

[guruilla]

We are not arguing because I don't read Jerky's posts anymore. Rightly or wrongly I see him as misrepresenting himself at this board. I do not believe he is sincere & so I choose not to engage with him. If it turns out I am wrong, I will apologize. But painting us with the same brushstroke as you are doing, as if this was simply a matter of disagreement, is itself a misrepresentation, IMO.

AFAIK, there's nothing remotely abusive in my posts about Jerky. I have seen enough of Jerky's to know that being verbally abusive is very much his MO, which is why I choose not to see his posts. I am not alone at this board in making this choice, either.

[EDIT: I did suggest he "back the fuck off" in my last post; that was a conscious expression of rage that I thought suited the circumstances & might help shake the scales from people's eyes. I did think about leaving it out but decided not to since I tend to err on the side of being diplomatic and "controlled". It doesn't compare to telling someone they are mentally ill however, which word got back to me about recently.]

[Jerky]

Jesus Christ... the BALLS on this fucking clown.

J

[Wombaticus Rex]

Jesus Christ... the BALLS on this fucking clown.

J

Cogent analysis, as ever.

You lament the intellectual degradation of RI quite a bit. Maybe lead by example.

AFAIK, there's nothing remotely abusive in my posts about Jerky.

...

EDIT: I did suggest he "back the fuck off" in my last post;

Yeah, whatever dynamic we've got going here simply needs to stop. Thanks.

[Jerky]

Wombat, he's literally accusing me of being in league with -- a co-conspirator among -- baby-eating, baby-fucking baby-murderers. So pardon my fucking scorn if his feathers get ruffled by a little salty fucking language. Boo-fucking-hoo.

J