After the Ball and After the Fall

The impossible just happened. The “unelectable” socialist Jeremy Corbyn has been elected leader of the Labour Party in the UK by a thumping majority, making him potentially the next prime minister. This earthquake was entirely unforeseen by the know-alls of political punditry, just as the equally improbable rise of Bernie Sanders in the US, another incorrigible old leftie, has amazed and baffled the American political establishment, not least Democratic front-runner (until now!) Hillary Clinton.
Be realistic: demand the impossible! So ran a famous slogan of the 1968 Paris uprising, and now that the impossible is indeed suddenly seeming quite realistic, it may be time to examine a radical plan recently put forward by a commentator here. Responding to Lensman’s blog on consent last month, Observer (“not minor-attracted, but hate the way you are treated”) introduced a plan he said could bring about positive change “in a few decades”, comparable to that achieved by the gay movement.
And what a plan! This is no mere sketchy outline of a few bullet points but a full-blown, detailed, 15,000-word exposition of what must be done and how to do it, set out in After the Fall: A Beginner’s Guide to Destroying Pedophobia in the 21st Century. This anonymous piece (Observer’s own?) asks how the gay movement managed to advance so far so quickly, and answers by referring to a game plan co-written by Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen entitled After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the ’90s. The style of After the Fall, and no doubt After the Ball too, is very professional, as though the writer has a background in advertising or public relations. We hear about geeky concepts such as Availability Cascades, and we can be sure it’s more than just clever-sounding BS because the gay movement has been stunningly successful using the concepts and techniques described.
Just a brief, jargon-free glance at some of these tactics, though, will suffice to make it obvious what was going on and why it worked. Perhaps the most important idea, though it long preceded After the Ball, was to take control of the language: people attracted to their own sex are “gay” (friendly, light-hearted, unthreatening) rather than “homosexual” (medical condition to be cured) or “perverted” (depraved evil-doers). As for who gays are, you go for prestige figures: famous kings, writers, etc., are claimed as gay even when the claim is a bit dodgy: Shakespeare, for instance. The point is not biographical accuracy but the kudos of being associated with the “world’s greatest playwright”.  And what gays do is emphatically not anal sex, with all its unfortunately messy implications. Sex is played down. The “message” is about love and relationships.
Numerous such tactics are adapted in After the Fall for application in a paedophilic context – oops, sorry, make that a kind context: homos are gay; paedos are kind.  But how much, really, is genuinely adaptable? One new idea, available only right now, in the digital age, looks exciting: anonymous donations using bitcoins in order to achieve a serious level of funding for slick, highly professional advertising campaigns, not just via videos on YouTube but billboards and a mainstream media presence. Unrealistic? Not necessarily.
The biggest single defect in the plan, though, is its lack of a historical perspective. The Kirk and Madsen game plan set out in After the Ball was published in 1989 and was spectacularly successful within a couple of decades. But this was merely the endgame. What a study tightly focused on this phase ignores is that the gay struggle began much earlier, before even the travails and trials of Oscar Wilde, towards the end of the previous century. Thomas Cannon published what is said to have been the first defence of homosexuality in English as long ago as 1749, more than a hundred years before the word itself made its way into the medical literature. Jeremy Bentham, advanced the first known argument for homosexual law reform in England around 1785. Paedophilia these days is arguably at the same historical point as homosexuality was in the 18th century, when you could be hanged for buggery.
In those days it would have been suicidal to come out as a “bugger” or a “sodomite”, or even as a “pederast”, a word which could at least be said to evoke the cultured ethos of Socratic Athens. But coming out, and facing similarly extreme perils to those living two centuries ago, is precisely what After the Fall prescribes as a tactic for kind people. Indeed, it is claimed as essential: many other aspects of the overall strategy depend upon it, such as having presentable, media-friendly spokesfolk.
Regular Heretic TOC readers will not need reminding that we had an extensive discussion of this coming out theme very recently, and I do not propose to reprise it, except to say that I broadly agree with those, such as Edmund and Josh, who feel coming out in present circumstances – or at least urging others to do so – veers towards the irresponsible. After the Fall recommends the use of direct action, taking protest militantly onto the streets, just as the gays have done, to demonstrate strength by being “loud and proud”. All this would achieve at present is to demonstrate our weakness, not our strength. The numbers we could draw upon, and the support from others in alliance with us, would be pathetic. We would be crushed and seen to be crushed. Already perceived as a bunch of losers, we would merely prove the point.
This is not to say there should be no coming out. As Dissident pointed out, the recent Czech documentary Daniel’s World, was about a young man’s coming out that did not wreck his life: as with so much else, it’s not necessarily what you do but when, where and how you do it. Another example, albeit from the more propitiously radical 1970s, is that of “Roger”. I’ll stick with the first name as he may well have gone back in the closet by now, in these more difficult times. He was not shy about being a boy lover in those days, and he came across as a rounded, grounded figure who did good work for a number of radical causes. So when he spoke up for children’s rights as well, he had real credibility.
After the Fall, however, is a fundamentally flawed plan. But that does not mean it is entirely without merit. One of its strongest aspects is identifying issues slightly at a tangent to hard-to-sell paedophilia, but which aim to address people’s feelings rather than their opinions. All successful advocates know that if you can tap into an emotional response, opinions will follow: the heart follows the head, not the other way around. Rational arguments fall on deaf ears unless there is some deeper connection to what we feel. The plan identifies our cultural heritage of sexual shame and guilt, expressed through obsessive body covering, as all-important. In the age of internet porn there is a tendency to think we are all (well, the guys among us at least) totally cool about seeing genitals and sexual action. But the collective feeling that porn is not OK finds revealingly vehement expression in the view that such things are absolutely not to be seen by kids.
After the Fall sees the encouragement of naturism as a great way to counteract such feelings: “Normalization of the genitalia (aka naturism) and sex-positivity are inextricably linked. We think penises and vaginas are weird because we don’t see them enough in normal settings, on normal people…. Once we begin to see them as normal parts of the body, we will naturally ask why we feel children cannot give others permission to touch there and nowhere else.”
As the plan astutely perceives, this approach is capable of promoting nudity in safely non-sexual ways: naturism can be about enjoying the sunshine and a sense of bodily freedom. It is about doing all sorts of ordinary things with no clothes on, and not just – or perhaps not at all – about sex. And naturism is very much for kids as well as grown-ups. Continental Europe already has a great naturist tradition that goes unacknowledged in After the Fall, which is very oriented towards addressing American cultural hang-ups. But the message needs vigorous reinforcement and development globally, including in Europe. Note that all of us except those who have unwisely come out, are well placed both to enjoy naturism ourselves and safely propagandise for it.
The other really good part of After the Fall is about the language we should use, especially the kind word. Let’s go for it, starting right now. I already did, actually, when I was interviewed by mad, man-hating lesbian feminist extremist Julie Bindel earlier this year, an improbable encounter I mentioned in passing in a comment here a couple of months back. She had asked if she could interview me for the Sunday Times. I emailed back saying she was the last person on earth I would want to be interviewed by. But like the scary heavy dyke she is, she wasn’t too troubled by my lack of consent: she just kept on harassing me until I gave in!
I tell a lie. Although there is no shifting her crazy anti-male prejudice, she did at least quote me fairly and accurately, as well as being surprisingly good company over dinner. Her piece was not, alas, accepted by the Sunday Times, but it has now turned up in the September issue of the right-wing cultural and political periodical Standpoint.  Anyway, here is what she quoted from me:

“I would have quite liked [to be labelled as] ‘kindly’ because ‘kindly’ . . . relates to the Dutch and German kinder — children. So yes, being intimate, but also being nice with it. I would say that if someone had sexual relations which were in the realm of what I called earlier the ‘kindly’ sort then that would not be abusive. Although these days one has to be careful because anything you do, no matter how kindly it is, it’s always subject to trauma later on — secondary trauma as a result of society’s hysteria over the whole thing.”

So, I like kindly. But kind is better, I must admit: a very straightforward monosyllable, easily seen as analogous with gay.
Finally, while we’re on the subject of language, the author of After the Fall would surely chide me for calling this blog Heretic TOC. Whereas he wisely emphasises going with the grain, where possible, identifying with majority sentiments rather than setting oneself against them, being labelled a heretic could hardly be more counterproductive. Sure, it draws fellow heretics here, so we can talk among ourselves, but arguably this language defines us as outcasts and bad guys. It’s a bit off message.
But then again, so are Jeremy Corbyn and Bernie Sanders. They have been saying the same “wrong things” for decades, sticking to their principles and fighting for what they believe rather than slavishly following the opinion polls and focus groups. And now, suddenly and unexpectedly, they find they are being respected for it. They are seen as authentic.
I wouldn’t mind a bit of that sort of reputation, even if it is only for me to be judged authentically odd, as seems likely! So, it may not be in the After the Fall plan, but I don’t think I’ll be changing the name of Heretic TOC anytime soon!

 

MY FRIEND WAS NO MURDERER: OFFICIAL
I had a very welcome email yesterday from James Gillespie of the Sunday Times, letting me know he intends to use some information I gave him after he approached me last month in connection with the so-called Westminster VIP paedophilia scandal.
Gillespie has long been sceptical of the crazy murder claims made by “Nick” and “Darren” via Exaggero (sorry, Exaro) News, and nonsense about Edward Heath and others mentioned in Heretic TOC last time. I have seen several of his excellent reports.
And now he has sent me a PDF of his latest, which informs us that the police have at last admitted they no longer believe “Darren’s” claim that my friend the late Peter Righton was a murderer. Their investigation has accordingly been dropped [“Police drop ‘VIP sex murder ring’ inquiry”, James Gillespie, Sunday Times, 13 September 2015]. Gillespie’s report is behind a paywall online, but his story was picked up by the Daily Mail. The first big breakthrough against these dodgy Exaggero witnesses was also in the Mail recently. This was a front-page lead saying the VIP scandal shows signs of “unravelling”, with the police finally getting cold feet over the lack of evidence to back up the claims of star fantasist “Nick”.
Sanity at last!

 

MORE ABOUT ROBIN
Another email, received a couple of days ago from Robin Sharpe’s daughter Katherine.
“I’m glad you are posting something on your blog,” she wrote, “That would make him happy. Thank you for doing that.”
In a tribute to her father, whose death was recently reported here (under “Sad news from Canada”), she says that as a child he instilled in her a love of camping, nature, architecture and art. As an adult, though, she had unsurprisingly found it difficult to deal with the high profile controversy he generated, or the “fallout”, as she calls it.
“Maintaining a relationship with my dad has been an exercise in compartmentalisation I would say. You box up and set aside what you cannot agree on, and try to work out the rest.”
Sounds very sensible; and I’d say she seems to have done a pretty good job.

0 0 vote
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
94 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

[…] thought given to political tactics and strategy was expressed in a blog here five years ago called After the Ball and After the Fall. The title was a reference to a 15,000-word anonymous political plan called “After the Fall: A […]

[…] to harness Bower Power for our own ends (new readers might want to check out my September 2015 blog After the Ball and After the Fall for the origins of […]

[…] Tom O’Carroll’s blog is a pretty grim read. Back in September, O’Carroll wrote a disturbing post praising Jeremy Corbyn’s election as leader, implying he wanted the paedophile movement to […]

[…] Tom O’Carroll’s blog is a pretty grim read. Back in September, O’Carroll wrote a disturbing post praising Jeremy Corbyn’s election as leader, implying he wanted the paedophile movement to […]

Linca

A week or so ago A. and I had an exchange about an Occupy The Courts Action that was to take place at The United States Courthouse 40 Foley Square in NYC. The Action took Place Monday September 28.
The reason we should be interested is that we who have been arrested or prosecuted or imprisoned or made to take therapy for accusations of child sexual abuse have had our constitutional right to Due Process Violated. We cannot present scientific evidence we caused no wrong either in our defence (Scientific Research has to be heard in court when it is presented as Evidence.) or in therapy (A therapist is required to use the results of Scientific Studies, i.e., The Rind Meta Analysis which has been updated and repeated 3 times.)
This is a news report of what happened at the Court House on Monday: http://www.hotindienews.com/2015/09/28/46491
This is a video talking with the two people who presented a request for an Appointment with The Foreman of The Federal Grand Jury in NYC: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zHDjsPqFg4w
These are considerations presented by “Occupy Action Council – NYC”:comment image?dl=0
What Occupy The Courts might have opened up for us is a whole new legal avenue. These are tough people with knowhow and knowledge.
Linca

Linca

Tom,
Do you think this action would be taking place without the full support and backing of the National Lawyers Guild who have been active with Occupy since 2011?
Heck in 1978 I got an interpretation from The National Labor Relations Board in The Taft Hartley Act of 1947 quoting right straight from the Act. This was the change to my great shame that President Reagan used to fire the Flight Controllers. I was the hero of people I couldn’t stand then and now detest even more. My lawyer even quit me saying what I was asking was not possible. I prepared the case myself, wrote my own brief, presented it before the NLRB, and won. The ‘be realistic’ is an argument I do not hear too well. I suspect the same goes for these ladies.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zHDjsPqFg4w
The action of these ladies is the step required to get a reaction so The Lawyers can move forward. We Sex Offenders stand to greatly gain from this action that took place yesterday: Greatly.
Thanx for publishing my comment.
Linca

Linca

These activists have no need to drop names: None at all. Their whole purpose is to bring previous decisions & interpretations forward into current law.
What do you think stood behind the one lady’s quick response saying their would be legal action. These people are locked and loaded for court. No name dropping necessary. This is New York not London: Shoot you in the face action.
Linca

Kamil Beylant

Any reaction to this speculation on Twitter about what James Gillespie may have learned from you? https://twitter.com/tara_snow/status/647450028311773184

mr pedo-man

This guy is appealing his sentence cos he didn’t realise that; According to ‘western morality’…he didn’t realise having sex with a 12yo was considered wrong — I think its quite tenable that he wasn’t aware of the pedo-hysteria:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/australasia/australian-artist-dennis-nona-appealing-conviction-for-rape-of-a-12yearold–because-he-claims-he-didnt-know-sex-with-children-was-wrong-10507987.html

Generalfeldmarschall

Sex between adults is wrong, this will be always my defense, pedophilia itself is a medicine, do not treat people of their diseases is a crime them to pay expensive. You see, these cops, judges, journalists, ordinary people and all that rabble in general are simply “suppressive sexualities”, their only goal is to prevent pedophilia to treat adultophilia, once youre a adultophile you will be a slave for life to his totalitarian society, politically, religious, cultural, sexually… etc. Keep that in mind!

A.
feinmann0

What a wonderful story A, and truly an amazing decision IMHO, not least because the age difference between the two lovers was just shy of half a century. Italy, a fellow EU country, is very family-focused, and I just wonder in this particular case, whether support from the girl’s family for the social worker swayed the court’s decision.
At the other extreme, back in the good ol’ medieval US of A where those in control like nothing better than to fuck up the lives of their own kids, the following horrendous court ruling: independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/teen-prosecuted-for-having-naked-pictures-of-himself-on-his-phone-10510586.html

A.

Oh, man. A new low, surely…though almost as bad was the case, also in the US, where a girl of 13 and a boy of 12 somehow managed to ‘rape’ each other simultaneously: http://www.denverpost.com/ci_4783650 . I’m not sure what the legal outcome was in that one.

Filip

I miss one very important and very difficult thing in the GREAT plan: What does the author recommend as the law against sexual abuse? People will ask about that in discussions. Why does the author not even mention this topic in his text?

mr pedo-man

There was a thesis he wrote regarding consent, so as to insure that if a kid was coerced into sexual activity the abuser would be breaking the law. It was forwarded to the, at the time, Justice secretary i think — I think TOC has a link.
At any rate, there’s plenty of sites promulgating how ‘harmful’ early sexual encounters are on young brains, With no hard evidence to back up their
claims!…Personally if someone had their butt squeezed in the 1970s I think they should just get over it: like i mentioned, I also went to boarding school, and it was a free-for-all, You had to learn how to defend yourself fast, One was was to befriend hard lads – Who were usually older – The dilemma came when i would defend a young friend who, himself, was a bully! remembering particular violent members of staff; And how they would kick you in the balls, Or whack you in the face — I would’ve traded that for being wanked off be the likes of MJ any day!

A.

Puts me in mind of this: http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/may/04/abuse-britain-private-schools-personal-memoir . The writer basically says that the one incident of teacherly penis-tugging when he was 9 or 10 was, though unpleasant, far from being the worst aspect of his time at boarding school. He reported it at the time. I get the impression that this was because it was the one aspect of the wretched experience that he knew was definitively forbidden, the one he knew he could perhaps get something done about. Sure, ‘carrying tales’ went against the school code, but sexual stuff was against all kinds of rules, unlike sending 7-year-olds away to boarding school or beating them when they were there. But then again, perhaps at some point he he did tell his parents about the other miseries too — he doesn’t remember doing so, but he didn’t remember reporting the young teacher either — and they figured the penis-tugging was the only problem that warranted action.

feinmann0

Just skimmed over Observer’s piece, have we Phil? I found three instances, sufficient to answer questions, where sexual abuse is referred to:
“Systems of support should be in place, and anyone close to the child should be able to file a complaint to have a relationship investigated. At the end of the day, what happens should be the child’s choice, because, it’s their body.”
“Child rape should be used to denote abusive instances of adult-child sex.”
“Restate the true meaning of sexual abuse. Everyone is against it, including us – and sexual abuse is any activity that physically or emotionally damages a person or was obtained under false pretences.”
The main tenet of Observer’s contribution, as far as I sensed it, was how to destroy Paedophobia, not an examination and formulation of sexual abuse law.

Filip

Once again the guide is GREAT, but in this law-issue is a weakness. For example in one sentence the author writes: “This precludes oral, anal or vaginal penetration of any kind.” In another sentence the author writes: “At the end of the day, what happens should be the child’s choice, because, it’s their body.” So can a 12-year-old give an oral stimulation if he or she wants to or not? The author didn´t tell the reader what age range he gives to the word child. Even scientific authors have very different opinions about that.
Yes, the plan is about how to destroy pedophobia, but without a very convincing plan how to prevent sexual abuse at the same time we will not win the hearts of the people for the legalization of adult-child-love. It would be great if the author of the plan could add a section and could make a proposal for the content a sexual abuse law that could be used in real life. I have the feeling he could suggest something that is convincing, and we need that very much.

feinmann0

Reply to Filip:
Reading between the lines of Observer’s comment: “Maybe these papers can give everyone inspiration and be reformatted into some sort of action plan”, I take it that his contribution is very much an initial draft, and that he has left it to MAPS to take his initiative to the next level.
“The author didn´t tell the reader what age range he gives to the word child …” and “It would be great if the author of the plan could add a section and could make a proposal for the content a sexual abuse law that could be used in real life. I have the feeling he could suggest something that is convincing, and we need that very much.”
Currently, every single country around the world has its own penal code containing its own age of consent figure and its own set of laws governing ‘sexual abuse’, so difficult to envisage any generic global law being implemented on this very specific topic. However, Observer suggests giving families the freedom to choose when the time is right, as parents know their children better than politicians. He adds: we wouldn’t accept this level of government interference in almost any other personal activity – it is up to the parent to make the final decision.

A.

I think we have to be strictly evidence-based about these things, and in the literature I have come across plenty of cases of 12- and 13-year-olds enjoying intercourse, vaginal or anal, with adults, but only a very few cases of younger kids enjoying it. So I feel that, as TOC suggested long ago, 12 would be a sensible age for allowing intercourse. There’d have to be stiff penalties, though, for adults who didn’t adhere to safer sex and contraceptive practices with their young partners, since kids younger than 15 or 16 are often, it seems, not developmentally ready to handle all that (of course some are, because development varies a lot from individual to individual). But I suck at coming up with workable legal proposals, because I’m pretty ignorant about how the law works. And any age limits are going to be less than ideal for some: what about the 7-year-old boy in Gerald Hannon’s article Men Loving Boys Loving Men (http://www.www.clga.ca/Material/Records/docs/hannon/ox/mbm.htm), who really enjoyed giving oral sex to men, including a policeman? Oral is less risky than anal or vaginal anyway…

mr pedo-man

Indeed…and 12 fits with the old English law, Before the ‘child prostitution’ hysteria…Remember the AOC was raised from 12 to 16 over a moral panic; The first of a bunch of whimpering feminasties!

A.

And within very recent memory it was 12 in the Netherlands unless the child, the child’s parent(s) or guardian(s) or a social worker lodged a complaint. Seemed to work fine.

mr pedo-man

A few thoughts on the migrant crisis…All of a sudden we must open our hearts and houses to these so called refugees, How noble, Only, How does that fit into the nuclear family, and the post Soham, post Salive Britain!
I have also mentioned that I’m a single male looking for refugee boys aged between 11 – 14 years old — But nobody is interested in that — I bet there would be vast quantities of resources willingly made availably by the MAP community if it was legal!

sugarboy

Yes, but… they will most likely be circumcised.

mr pedo-man

If they’re OK with it, So am I…I hear Rome is getting a bit of a reputation with migrant boys — These unaccompanied ‘vulnerable’ travellers selling sex or drugs; As Newsnight put it “bringing out the worst in human nature”…Ah well, we’re not that unusual then!….Also on Victoria Derbyshire they were discussing Police cuts, If you have a burglary, the Police may not come until the next day, ‘we have to prioritise’…And she brought up ‘child sexual exploitation’ a number of times — So basically, They want to focus resources on…’catching the paedos’!

A.

If I recall correctly, John Bridcut in Britten’s Children writes that Britten at one point was keen to adopt a refugee boy, I forget from where, in that age range. Unfortunately when the boy arrived things did not go well and he was soon packed off somewhere else. Bridcut, perhaps wishing to say nothing bad of his hero, passes over this episode rather hastily.

Josh

If you are really looking to be a father than it should not matter to you what sex they are. I would not respond to someone who was that specific either. It makes it seem like you are more interested in exploiting this refugee crises for a sexual partner than actually raising a child. I’m sorry but that is, dare I say it, creepy.
The only thing I’d be willing to help with is building their own country so they can go back. Sorry but I do not want a bunch of muslims in Europe. I’ve already had enough of Christianity as is it, I don’t want to trade that in for another religion that is just as stupid and harmful.
I mostly blame the US and Nato and the EU for this disaster. They want to bomb their countries and then turn around and act like the savior by flooding them into Europe. It’s absolutely infuriating. What they want is control of Syria. They do not care about the people who lived there, they only pretend to in order to complete their land grab.

mr pedo-man

That was an Ironic joke..No minor has ever referred to me as creepy.

Decent GL

I would like to discuss a couple of things that appear in the guide:
The first is the issue of nudity, seriously? I will not go naked or support that, I never liked nudity or like me that. It is true that the human body must be treated as something natural, but is exaggerated! and marijuana? I have also who is in favor of this too? if I am in favor of pedophilia I have to be in favor of everything else? I am in favor of pedophilia but against everything that has been legalized in the last 50 years, this is not progress, it is degeneration.
And what is the “paedo” mustache?! here has gone too far, I really have to shave me for not to look “creepy”? !! I can not even have a mustache, not a 50’s style mustache even? Kenny Loggins appears here as “creepy” ???comment image
Besides, really you want to be “LGTBP”? I personally detest them, sorry, never going anywhere with them, the pederasty is the only form of homosexuality that I accept, you noted something about that the Greeks shunned gays and lesbians but created the pederasty? homosexuality is the unwanted son of pederasty, this “LGBT” is nothing but fools believed themselves something that will never be and will know, the true boy-man love.
And finally, why? why we must create a tolerant, pacifist, socialist-like legalizes-all society, and ultimately, an nudist anti-militarist society? military is power and this society stinks, really want to join it? soon this degenerate capitalist society will fall in the pit by their vices.
And by the way, instead of “Kind”, I propose “Kinder Kaiser” is groovy and up the ego too, yes, I’m a bit weird…

Will Decker

Hello All,
I looked at related words to ‘Kind’. The one I like most is ‘Noble’. How about we Pedophiles from now on be Nobles?
If homosexuals could become gays why not we pedophiles become nobles? That is certainly how I feel about myself and the feelings I have had for boys since I was a boy. That probably goes for many right here on Heretic TOC.
Love,
Linca

A.

I felt a bit iffy about ‘kind’ or ‘noble’ at first glance because at least ‘gay’ grew more or less naturally into its present use comment image). But then…the restraint and gentleness shown by many CLs, amply documented by e.g. my favourite Lautmann, *is* kind and noble. And it even shores up a particular strand of feminist argument (she said, getting more wild-eyed by the minute): the one that says we should throw out the the idea that if you’re a woman and you get into bed with a man, on your own head be it if anything bad happens to you, because the poor guy can’t control himself. “From the moment when a girl says she doesn’t want to anymore, I also do not try to persuade or compel her, because I accept that. When I like a girl, it’s okay to me if she says no. And what’s fun for both is, I think, okay, whatever the girl’s age.” CLs like this good gentleman, who are the rule rather than the exception, give the lie to all that. And the strong sense of sexual ethics demonstrated by most of Lautmann’s subjects was worked out in almost total isolation. Many of these guys had friends who were also CLs, but they didn’t belong to a paedophile organisation, and this was before the Internet. They behaved decently because that’s what you do.

A.

Lots more carefree nudity would have the welcome side effect of showing kids, and adults, what people’s bodies actually look like in, you know, real life, something which mainstream porn these days spectacularly fails to do (that’s one reason why many feminists object to some of it).

lensman

One shouldn’t give too much credence to gut instincts, but the following is a thought-experiment I find myself conducting almost every day:
go to a supermarket crowded with families, or a playground, or a primary school at home-time.
Look at the kids.
Most readers here will know that many, maybe all, of those kids are capable of seeking and enjoying some level of intimacy with some adult they like, trust, and are maybe attracted to. Many paedophiles will have incidents of children seeking physical intimacy with them happily stored in their memories. Whether those sometimes-tentative approaches were followed up is a different matter, of course.
Then look at their parents.
Can you imagine them permitting you to engage even in a non-sexual relationship with their child, never mind a sexual one? Aren’t you left feeling the sheer impossibility of your sharing some meaningful, intimate relationship, openly and licitly, with their little daughter/son? Doesn’t something about the nuclear family leave you feeling just how impossible such a situation could be?
I mean, we’ve all got protective instincts, we’re all vulnerable to fear and jealousy. Why would a parent willingly allow his little daughter’s affection and love to be directed towards an other man or woman? I know that I’d feel terribly hurt, betrayed and jealous, destroyed even, if I had a daughter and I found she was in love with another adult.
Yes, the joy and hope I feel when I see a beautiful and friendly-looking child kind of dies a little when I see her parents and I imagine those parents’ inevitable reaction to our imagined relationship. Open and licit non-familial child-adult relationships go hard against the teak-tough grain of the nuclear family and any talk about the possibility of such relationships that ignores the nature of the family (and other related issues) is missing the central problem: the institution that defines all society’s ideas about childhood and children’s relationships with others and the community.
Observer’s ideas and vision are welcome and inspiring, but I think he’s made a mistake in thinking that gay liberation has been anything more than a pushing at an open door. Society, in the last few decades of the 20th Century, had become ripe for the acceptance of homosexuality.
During the last 4 decades of the 20th century – the economic systems of the UK, the USA and many other western nations were moving from manufacturing to service industry. Not all of it, of course, but what mattered most was that these economies stopped defining themselves through manufacturing and heavy industry and started to define themselves, and their projects for the future, in terms of services and consumerism.
This meant a redefinition of gender roles – men no longer needed the strength, endurance and manly chararcteristics associated with and required for heavy industry, but needed adaptability (because of rapidly changing job market), communication skills etc – likewise women started to access more masculine parts of the labour market – and hence the blossoming of the ideas that underlie feminism.
This created a situation where gender identity became more fluid – a case of gradations, rather than the black and white ‘hard man’ or a ‘poof’ conception of masculinity of the 50S and before. Gender roles were being redifined. Though it is comforting to think that gay liberation was acheived through that community’s intelligence, hard work, creativity and elan, really all the hard work had been done by these economic and institutional changes that preceded it and ran concurrently to it. Gay liberation merely pushed at this open door – and that is why it was so readily accepted by the general population – it was part of a deeper zeitgeist of ‘new men’ and ‘women’s empowerment’.
What entrenches paedophobia is the nature of the nuclear family, and other social institutions and phenomena which isolate children (and parents) within it. If I, as a paedophile, find it hard to imagine how, from within the confines of the nuclear family as we have it, a father, or mother could countenance his little son or daughter engaging in a licit and open relationship with an adult, how much harder, in effect ‘impossible’, it would be for that non-paedophile father or mother to do so!
The good news is that the nature of the nuclear family, which seems so entrenched and natural, something eternal and ineluctable, History shows to be fluid and ever-changing. Children haven’t always grown up in such narrow, suffocating, institutions.
It’s no coincidence that the nuclear family has further compacted over the period of paedo-hysteria as the Community has played an ever diminished role in children’s lives.
This is the push-me-pull-you of our conceptions of ‘childhood’ – are children the ‘property’ of their parents, defined by this relationship, or are they members of a wider community – in which their identity can be defined by a wide variety of contacts and experiences, including relationships with non-familial, non-professional adults too. This tug-o-war is one in which the ‘nuclear family’ is currently trouncing ‘the community’ and we see the results around us.
So long as we concentrate our struggle on ‘paedophilia’ or even ‘children’s rights’ we are to a certain extent fighting over ‘symptom relief’. It is right that we should do this – both causes are valid and valuable and the philosophy, ideas and evidence that support our case needs to be constantly argued, developed, exposed and supported.
But we have to face the fact that ultimately what will determine acceptance of our love is something which is not in our hands to change: how the community and the family function and are understood by society.

lensman

>”Parents need help, and there is perhaps no intrinsic reason why kinds cannot be reinvented as their friends, not rivals.
I know this can and does work in circumstances only a little less fevered than at present. Michael Jackson’s obvious affection for (to say the least) and intimacy with boys had the support of their parents in many cases, and not just “vulnerable” ones: Macaulay Culkin, for instance, was a big star in his own right and his parents were no push-overs.”
I’m deep into reading your “Dangerous Liaisons”, Tom, and the attitude of Culkin’s parents and Chandler’s, even more, (at first) do seem very enlightened.
I suppose one defense of my maybe-too-absolute stance re the nuclear family is something that one of my old sociology teachers used to say: “deviance is normal”.
Given any social phenomebon which can manifest itself in a variety of ways there will always be outliers – distribution of attitudes following a ‘normal’ or ‘bell’ curve. What determines society’s attitudes and its laws are not the vanishingly scarce populations that make up the ‘feet’ of the curve but the huge mass that makes up the centre.
But still it would be fascinating to know more about the attitudes of such parents, how they were ‘won over’, how open with the parents the child and their adult lover were about their intimacy…
Just to say also what a brilliant read your “Dangerous Liaisons” is turning out to be – that you’ve managed to organise so much complicated information and make it lucid and gripping (I’m on the second chapter about the trial) AND at the same time correllate it with the whole philosophy of paedophilia and children’s sexual rights is quite a tour de force.

A.

Parents absolutely are struggling, and much more so recently as people are expected to be at the beck and call of their employers all the time and kids are no longer allowed to give their parents a welcome break by heading off to play out by themselves. I’m hoping to see more willingness to admit the facts. Studies like this one are a step in the right direction: http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20150814/entlife/150819532

Christian

This study deals with Germany, a country with a very low fertility rate and a poor childcare policy (the two are linked), where motherhood often means a break in a woman’s career. Had it been made in France, a country with a much higher fertility rate and a better childcare, the results would probably have been different.

A.

I did wonder about that. I’ve heard that in some parts of Germany there’s a lot of pressure on women to be stay-at-home mothers. In Iceland the birthrate is comparatively very high, partly because of the culture but also partly because they have such great policies around parental leave, childcare, etc. And two things that are really striking when you visit Iceland are that there are lots of men looking after young kids and lots of kids playing outside by themselves.
Mind you, one reason, though not the biggest, for the hit to happiness was complications from the birth, and we can’t do a lot about that except try and advance obstetrics and gynaecology, if that’s our field, and be more honest about the potential physical consequences so that people know what they are getting into.

Bloom

Spot on analysis of the influence of the ‘nuclear family’ ideology.
On this..

Can you imagine them permitting you to engage even in a non-sexual relationship with their child, never mind a sexual one? Aren’t you left feeling the sheer impossibility of your sharing some meaningful, intimate relationship, openly and licitly, with their little daughter/son? Doesn’t something about the nuclear family leave you feeling just how impossible such a situation could be?

I don’t live in the US or UK (thank god) so my mileage may vary, but I honestly think this is over pessimistic.
Sexual interaction with kids might always be fraught, but its not something I seek so I can’t really comment on it. However, I do have some experience of being relatively open, even brutally frank about my attraction to children. Despite this, I’ve been able to have friendships with children whose parents are privy to my feelings. What’s more, and very importantly for me, these friendships have been acknowledged as authentic and positive contributions to those children’s lives. Parents appreciate help with child raising and will make time for another adult to develop a relationship with their child if they think it is a positive thing.
I think we risk ghettoizing ourselves on account of our sexual feelings. We all have them, but how we express them and how we think they ought to be expressed is our own business. We don’t need to turn celibacy into a virtue to find pleasure and satisfaction in platonic friendship and love.

A.

What you say is very persuasive.
And yet…we know that parental acceptance can happen, because it has happened. These articles are from the Netherlands less than three decades ago: https://www.ipce.info/newsletters/BROCH.html https://www.ipce.info/library/newspaper-article/my-child-does-it-pedophile
Granted, they mostly deal with boys. Parental acceptance of relationships between girls and men would likely be a little harder to come by, perhaps especially if a relationship were not a cuddly friendship between an 8-year-old and the avuncular neighbour but a love affair, or something approaching it, between a pubertal girl and a man. Parents would be worried about pregnancy, STIs and the possible emotional manipulation of a naive kid in love. But even here, it’s possible. One GL interviewed by Lautmann described the relationship he had with a 12-year-old when he was 18: “The parents were in agreement now about our necking and petting, which they were so liberal about. The mother had said, ‘Petting is okay, but please hold off on the other thing for a while yet, until she’s older’.” (They didn’t! In fact, they wound up having PIV intercourse every day, sometimes twice a day.) A woman on the Captain Awkward blog describes her relationship with a man about 10 years older: “…we met when I was 17. (I live in a place where 16 is the age of consent). Both my friends and family and his were understandably wary, mine were very protective, but when it became apparent he loved me, respected me and had no inclination towards moulding me into the perfect girl, everyone settled down.”
Realistically speaking, an adult lover is not often going to supplant parents in a child’s affections, anyway. Most of the boys in Boys on their Contacts with Men said that their adult friends were important to them but their parents more so. Some ranked their adult friends higher in importance, but then, some had problems in their relationships with their parents, and I suspect there may have been a big overlap between the two groups. The supplanted parents may, that is, have been the type not to care all that much that they were supplanted. 11-year-old Roger Duncan’s dad was quite cavalier about “sharing” his son with Benjamin Britten.

lensman

There does seem to be a phenomenon of some parents accepting/tolerating an adult having intimacy with boys – usually of the hebephilic/ephebophilic age range.
I’m wondering if there is a British phenomenon, linked to the cultural dominance of private boarding schools, institutions which were a world unto themselves and where, it seems, there often existed a culture of paederasty.
Maybe parents who emerged from these schools were able to take a more tolerant attitude towards their pubertal sons having relationships with men?
(of course, this doesn’t explain the Culkins allowing their son to be close to Michael Jackson – but I’ve been looking back through Tom’s book and suspect that the parents never really thought that their son was having a sexual relationship with MJ – they bought into the idea that Jackson was an innocent and asexual lover of children – I’d be interested to see what Tom has to say about this)
Benjamin Britten’s relationship with Roger Duncan would fall under the influence of the boarding school system but would also have been of the pre-Thatcher, pre-hysteria era, where the UK still saw itself as a manufacturing economy, a period where children were much less tied to the home and the nuclear family than they are today.
I also wonder just how much significance we should give to parents who go against the hegemony, wonderful though they are? It is normal that every population will contain individuals who deviate from the norm. Maybe there are more of such parents than we think? Certainly it would be an under-reported phenomenon rather than an over-reported one, since such parents would make efforts to keep such attitudes and actions secret.
Another question that could be asked about such tolerant parents is whether such attitudes might be made more likely by one or both of the parents being themselves paedophiles.
I suspect that if I were a parent I’d have difficulty accepting someone else being loved by my child (but I’m a little insecure, possessive, and prone to jealousy).
And that is me thinking in the abstract, out of any real context. My acceptance of such a relationship would certainly be facilitated by my seeing it as philosophically justified, and probably the real, lived details of the relationship and the happiness it might be bringing my child would also be a key factor in leading me to accept it.

A.

Interesting you should say that about the boarding schools, as I just found this: https://www.ipce.info/host/rivas/boys_men/gavin_lambert.htm . “I felt abandoned by my teacher-lover, by then emotionally far more important to me than my parents, who never suspected his existence.” Well, I guess that is liable to happen when you send your 11-year-old off to boarding school!
It would be foolish to think that the parents in the articles I linked were anything more than a minority, even at that time and in that place. But maybe all you need’s a few. Because then articles like this get published and people see them and talk to their friends and little by little acceptance spreads…maybe. And I do agree with your point that the particular details of this particular relationship are likely to wind up being the most important thing, not what a parent thinks of such things in general. The woman I quoted above, the one who had a relationship with an older man beginning when she was 17, added in her post that she understands why everyone was wary, because she “lucked out” given that “90%” of such relationships are bad news. 90%? Really? As TOC said long ago in Paedophilia: The Radical Case, it often seems to turn out that the people you know are OK, and the people you don’t know are the baddies!
Nearly all parents will eventually have to realise that the child who once told them everything doesn’t any more; that the child wants to be with his/her friends rather than coming on family outings; that a first love has eclipsed all other relationships, for a while. It hurts. And it hurts child-lovers to see young friends growing up and growing away. In many respects that’s a sorrow parents and paedophiles share.

A.

I have an old copy of the Penguin Book of Homosexual Verse, edited by Stephen Coote and first published in 1983. It contains a lot of stuff celebrating the erotic charms of boys as young as 12, as well as a naughty poem about woman-girl sex by intergenerational couple Verlaine and Rimbaud. In the introduction, Coote thanks one Anthony Reid for access to his “collection of paedophiliana”! But we can see which way the wind’s blowing: Coote also writes in the introduction that rather than the old ideal of Greek love, he supports the ideal of a love “between mature equals”. And that was a shift that took place, to a lesser extent, among heterosexuals too. It’s no longer socially acceptable for a man to call his slightly younger fiancée “little girl” as a term of endearment or to treat her in a vaguely paternal way, but it used to be. These things jar us when we watch old romance movies. We no longer assume so readily that a woman is getting affection and security out of a heterosexual relationship while a man’s getting sex; rather, we tend to assume that both people are getting much the same benefits from their relationship, since women also like sex and men also like affection. On the whole I think it was a good shift, but the baby got thrown out with the bathwater.
Incidentally, someone’s dedicated a whole website to Fabian Strachan Woodley, one of the Uranian poets featured in Coote’s book. According to the biographical info, Woodley was keen on sports at school, won a Military Cross in the First World War and became a local journalist and then an English teacher at various fancy boys’ boarding schools. He wrote charming verse about beautiful adolescent boys. There’s also a poem for a girl’s 10th birthday, a touching piece on the death of his mother and one on a lover killed in the war. Despite the latter event, Woodley’s war poems are highly romantic, unlike those of Wilfred Owen, a boy-lover too but one whose tastes ran rather younger. Here’s the site: http://ganymedes.webs.com/

His name was Shame

I began to realise at Seventeen that my feelings toward boys didn’t fit in with the the gay agenda. It wasn’t just that I liked younger boys, but my wanting to look after them and somehow guide them and finding them to be angelic princes seemed so much deeper than those of the gay types I knew, including my then best friend who said half-tongue-in-cheek that he would “read about me in the paper one day”. So, I first heard about loving boys in the context of the Ancient Greeks, and then I slowly began to trace the thread of boylove throughout history, then discovering in a gay shop the book on Oscar Wilde by Neil Mckenna, which confused me because I had always reflexively understood Wilde and his circle to have been pollitically-correct Gays. The cover of that book promotes this narrative by featuring his image in ‘drag’. Having come to the conclusion I possessed a different and far nobler sexuality to gayism, I had a crisis of faith in discovering that gayistics and boylove were in close quarters back in the seventies and eighties before gays made their pact with the Internationalists and boylove sent down the memory hole.
What does this mean? If some gay twink-hunter used to go with boys when they were younger, but now that they can’t get away with it, denounce boylove, then it means that boylove shouldn’t be permitted ever. It means that the purity of boylove is jsut self-delusion of a few fanatics. It bothered me because it suggests that if anyone who loved a boy could then denounce the purity of the feelings I have experienced, then what is boylove? I wish I could make better sense. I used to attend that G-A-Y Late and a few others when I was eighteen and didn’t like what I saw: there was none of the sensitivity toward each other. To be honest, I really don’t like gay people at all

A.

As I remember, the transcripts of Wilde’s trial indicate that he was mainly interested in working-class youths 16-20 and a bit older, and that he was not above engaging in rather questionable behaviour consent-wise, such as getting these youths drunk to loosen them up. Bosie Douglas liked boys as young as 12; Robbie Ross at 23 or 24 had sex with a 16-year-old. All of this is glossed over in the 1997 film starring Stephen Fry, which manages to imply that Wilde went to prison for his relationship with Douglas. And that, it seems, is what most people believe.

Sapphocidaire

Stephen Fry? That obnoxiously pretentious, self-pitying, self-described “socialist” millionaire and all-round oily rent-a-mouth is the embodiment of Hamlet’s description of the cringing courtier, Osric:
Thus has he– and many more of the same bevy that I
Know the drossy age dotes on– only got the tune of
The time and outward habit of encoutner; a kind of
Yesty collection, which carries them through and
Through the most fanned and winnowed opinions; and do
But blow them to their trial, the bubbles are out.
He has said defensively that Oscar Wilde’s love of youth was “not paederastic” in an interview for the promotion of that dreadful film, in which Wilde is portrayed as a contemporary middle-class Gay man, who were it not for those dreadful Victorian hypocrites would basically be free to be Stephen Fry himself with his ipod and frivilous twitter stream. As well as defending paederasty in his writings,as you rightly point out, Wilde had relationships with boys and he also introduced Andre Gide to a beautiful twelve year old boy to whom the latter lost his virginity; in a letter he describes how he kissed a fifteen year old boy, Giusseppe Loverde, behind the altar, and he wrote following his imprisonment for Gross Indecency that “Uranian love” was “more noble than the other forms”.
About Fry, I was especially annoyed by his pretensions toward everything “Greek” when I watched the clip of him with Christopher Hitchens dressing down a Roman Catholic Bishop at a debate organised by the British Broadcasting Craperation, part of their Intelligence Squared debating series for the pleasure of the Latte-drinking classes in Islington, who enjoy having the opportunity to celebrate how openminded they are.
He was oleaginously sucking up to Hitchens throughout, but it was his contrasting the intolerance of the Abrahamic religions with the inclusiveness of the pagan pantheon which bothered me most. I have read that women in Ancient Greece, certainly in the upper classes, lived in purdah, and that men who allowed themselves to be sodomised were excluded from holding political office. Such a hypocritical contrast. At one point he specifically decried the “abuse” carried out by priests, knowing it would release a torrent of approval from the bigotted liberal audience, which it did.
Since then he’s been pushing the favourite line of liberal bigots, that of the clash of civilisations, where the modern liberal order is set against the “mediaevel” (read: barbarous) practicies of Islam. Thsi is one of the cynical tricks used by the LGBT movement, by suggesting the origins of ‘homophobia’ today are entirely the fault of the church, and thereby riding the feminist wave of destruction as every institution with a hint of patriarchy is overwhelmed by the witchunt, senile old men rooted out for public humiliation and all tradition obliterated in its path. Disgusting! Their latest mechanism is to attach themselves to the so-called New Atheists, who claim the mantle of the Enlightenment against ‘obscurantism’. Because it takes such courage to attack the church! Ha! If Voltaire was alive today he would be pouring scorn on these Bloomsbury litterateurs and instead holding the pseudoscience of psychology to its deserved account: it is this globalized form of terror which gives legitimacy to the social-workerization of modern civilisation, the greatest threat to liberty.
The origin of the systematic persecution of homosexual men in the late nineteenth century in England is at the convergence of the emerging medicalisation of human behavior and the growing power of feminists in the Social Purity Movement, who lobbied for a higher age of consent AND the illegalisation of homosexuality. I believe this essayist points out that it wasn’t until 1978 that homosexuality was taken off the list of mental diseases by the American Psychiatric ASSociation, following pressure by Gay activist groups. Of course, the gays later availed themselves of the doctrine of victimology, these self-pitying swine, who force their way of life on everyone now, as a gloating and self-possessed liberal bigotry swamps the age through television soap opera plots, characters in films, song-lyrics and education in schools.
So, has this admirer of all things Greek ever criticised the persecution by evil feminists of homosexual men for having loved boys, or spoken up for the treatment of boys being forced to feel something evil was done to them by men? The damage done by that. He runs over to Russia, when he should address his own responsibilities as an alleged Grecophile. No? Well, then. He is an enemy of homosexual love, the beating heart of which is between an man or a youth and a boy. Nor do some fair-weather comments about his once-famous nonce friends make him a truth-teller.
I agree with Decent GL that “kind love” should be unleashed as an ideological force. The author of this essay suggests it may be possible one day to append an initial ‘P’ to the end of the LGBT acronym, but the Lesbian whiphands who control who is allowed to access that identity would never permit it, and, anyway, I believe it would be a wrong thing to do as a matter of conscience: love of minors is powerfully formative by the very force of its disparate nature, and cannot be choked into a slot within the current psycho-social-economic order. (Ha! It amuses me when gay men, in a feeble attempt not to appear as emasculated cowards, use teh acronym ‘GLBT’ instead) I think of the Renaissance artists and artisans like Caravaggio, Cellini and Da Vinci, to whom boys were apprenticed and were then immediately involved in the creative process under the close instruction of these men. One artist, I can’t remember who, invited the most beautiful boys in the city to become his apprentices. Such beauty fed their hearts to exalt the male form by way of sculpture and painting we can see today.
I despise the idea of using the same methods as gays to gain acceptance, especially the playing the victim part, these emasculated, self-pitying and annoying terrorists.
It’s all a moot point, anyway. If you want a vision of the future, picture a gay boot stomping on a minor-attracted person’s face – forever- while a Lesbian overseer looks on.

A.

And yet I have always had the impression Fry is, shall we say, sympathetic in a very special way to BLs. His current partner is much younger than he is. As a very young man he wrote a naughty play about a 13-year-old boy who runs away with his schoolmaster. Then he wrote a novel (The Liar) in which the main character sees boys 11-13 doing sex work and wonders if they’d like the classroom any better, and in which the hero writes a play spoofing Dickens, featuring a scene where a do-gooding man is riven with guilt after sort of accidentally having sex with a street boy, and the boy is played by a young man who still looks 14, and in fact he is the boy the hero was in love with at school, and who’s never any older than 14 in the hero’s heart (if it sounds convoluted, that’s the point). His first memoir, Moab is my Washpot, features descriptions of his childhood sexual play with other boys and of an episode in which he received anal sex from an older boy at 13 and which he says caused him no harm. Elsewhere in the book he criticises child abuse hysteria and waxes lyrical over his schoolboy love for a slightly younger boy and his grief when the boy’s beauty was lost under sideburns and muscles. He also writes that BL novels such as Michael Campbell’s Lord Dismiss Us, Roger Peyrefitte’s Special Friendships and Angus Stewart’s Sandel were very important to his adolescent self.
So I was slightly surprised by the “not pederastic” comment, but then quickly not at all surprised. The climate is radioactive, more so than when Moab was published in 1997.

Linca

A,
We get abandoned by former allies especially in this climate where we are intimidated into allowing our due process rights violated, i.e., bringing up for example Rind’s Meta Study either in our defense or it being required to be a part of our court mandated therapy sessions.
There just might be a remedy to having our due process rights violated: Federal Grand Jury. Justice Scalia in a decent said that The Grand Jury is the Forth Branch of Government it can investigate and hold accountable any of the other three branches. When I heard this on a NYC radio station yesterday evening and I heard the person say “Due Process” in her list of what a Grand Jury can cover my ears perked up. Heck we just might be able to get the overwhelming resources of the Federal Government to hold The Federal Government Accountable. Wouldn’t that be something?
I will be paying attention to the person I heard on the radio. In fact they are having an action at the United States Court of Appeals for The Second Judicial Circuit in NYC on Monday, September 28 at 9:00am in EDT. Their Facebook page can be found by searching for Occupy The Courts. Somebody here on H-TOC might be close enough to attend and get to know these people. The process to get an appointment with The Grand Jury Foreman is rather simple, straight forward and he is required to hear you out.
Tom of course knows how to get hold of me to pass on any information you might come up with.
In the mean time we can expect more former allies to bale.
Love,
Linca

A.

Very interesting, thank you, will follow.

stephen6000

Gracious me, what a rant! It’s nice to let off steam of course, but couldn’t you have chosen a more worthy target than Stephen Fry, who, as I and other contributors have pointed out, has occasionally been quite supportive of us? Maybe Tom Watson, Esther Ranzen or Ophrah Winfrey, perhaps?

His name was Shame

Esther Rantcid? Yeah, I caught her once on Sky News holding forth with the self-possessed nerve of a social worker who knows she has the full backing of the grim authority of the state. Her minions who must lurk this site got my tumblr account removed,with the effect that I shan’t be able to provide a link to it here, anymore. I received an email from the tumblr people saying it contained child pornography, when it mostly displayed watercolours of beautiful boys at play. What a perverse age we live in, when it is judged as depraved to ackhnowledge the erotic allure in the time-honoured representation of a beautiful boy in his muscular flower of boyhood, but the sight of a woman with a moustache and beard having won the Eurovision song contest is celebrated to enforced cheers as a step forward for the liberation of human sexuality and ‘gender diversity’.
Tom Wartson is especially vile, almost enough to deter me from voting labour in the next election, though with any luck I’ll be dead by then from having been hit by a bus.

EEthanic

LOL, but we, the real humans have to put up with all kinds of witchcraft (and I mean major players here) in our so wonderful times. Hope the bus misses.

mr pedo-man

Don’t judge all Gays the same…I got a gay friend, who to my surprise has started thinking about young women — He’s very open minded, I can chat to him as openly as writing on this blog..Well maybe more, NO OFFENCE TOC or should that be no OFENC! (brassEye)

Linca

Shame,
Your posts always bring memories to mind. You mentioned Rome, what is happening there now. It brought to mind Jarman’s Caravaggo. Just Google Jarman Caravaggio and you will find a link to his entire 1986 film “Caravaggio”. It starts out with the boy he bought, now a man, watching him die. Can you imagine the love?
Sometime ahead the Love That Has No Name will reign. We must, Be Realistic: A New World Is Possible.
My mom back in the day was the sponsor of a girls high school club. They couldn’t decide on a name so they called themselves, The’Nominees’ which they said meant “no name”.
Love,
Linca ….who is getting a copy of “The Secret Life of Oscar Wilde” today. L

Christian

Thanks a lot, “A.”, for pointing out the poetry of Woodley. I will indeed reproduce “Viola’s birthday” on Agapeta.

A.

You’re welcome! Great blog! 🙂

A.

There’s also been a shift in attitudes to couples with different levels of sexual experience. One of the cornerstones of the good girl-bad girl view of sex, discussed in Ann Fessler’s The Girls Who Went Away, was that when a young couple married, he’d be sexually experienced already, having had sex with girls from the smallish pool of ‘sluts’ who were Not Marriage Material. She, meanwhile, would learn about sex from him, having waited in virginal purity along with most of the other girls. I’m very glad we have (mostly) seen the back of that idea. But, again, the baby’s been thrown out with the bathwater. Adult-child relationships often involve one partner being somewhat parental towards the other, involve partners who are each getting something different from the relationship, involve one partner teaching the other about sex. I most definitely wouldn’t want to see that sort of set-up become the dominant paradigm again, but we need to leave room for it, just as some socially liberal people these days leave room for polyamory (it’s the cool new thing) even though monogamy is the dominant paradigm. I mean, come on, if we can accept BDSM relationships while upholding that ideal of a partnership between mature equals, surely adult-child relationships shouldn’t be that hard to accept within the same framework!

Sapphocidaire

Myself, I don’t care about the current framework or what society thinks. I don’t care what feminists want.
Boylove is a force in itself.
If girls and fucking 18 years old WOMEN are vulnerable, then they should go back to being “looked after” by their husbands, as if I care.

Linca

Yes Sapphocidaire “Boy Love” is a force. It might just be and probably will be the force that makes a new world possible. That new world be one that heads back to our Paleo Past where we were egalitarian, cooperative, peaceful people before agriculture when starvation, murder and war began 10,000 years ago. Going back to our Paleo Past does not mean we go back to the Savanna and pick berries again. It means we develop social systems then enable us to be egalitarian, cooperative, peaceful people. I would suggest we look toward Deming’s System of Profound Knowledge. Look it up.
Be Realistic: A New World Is Possible. Boy Love might be just the force that makes it begin to happen.
Love,
Linca 🙂

mr pedo-man

But you need an army, to defend humanity in the face of tyranny. I understand that WW1 Was a huge loss of life, and maybe pointless — But not WW2 Nazism was a fucked up ideology that had to be smashed: ISIS needs to be smashed fast, Why are people pussy footing about, They are just a bunch of raping, bloodthirsty and cultural vandals – whose religion, If taken literally will have you driving straight into a brick wall!

generalfeldmarschall

Look, mr pedo-man, I already had proposed to make an army of pedophiles, with disastrous results, pedophiles do not want any army, or me as his generalissimo, whether you’ve thought of something military-type, say goodbye… Sorry for give bad news, bro.
But you know what the most powerful weapon against those filthy religions? a religion of love for children / teenagers, if you just kill him, will return, but if you conquer your hearts you won two battles together, remember how you feel when you think about boys or girls, I feel salvation and peace. And I say that more evidence is needed to prove my religion that the bliss of those who follow?
I look like a preacher, super-duper!

generalfeldmarschall

Wow, National-Pederasty, as cool, man!
I want to be an BL-Sturmbannführer!
People who like young girls are jerks like me! in girlove are no strength, boylover is pure “man” force, homosexuality is the pinnacle of humanity! Please tell us how to be the strongest!

Filip

“Paedophilia these days is arguably at the same historical point as homosexuality was in the 18th century, when you could be hanged for buggery.”
When the concept and word homophobia was invented about 1965 this was very important for the gay movement and changed a lot. Hopefully the word and concept pedophobia will have the same influence. Maybe Tom one day you can describe why the word (and concept) pedophobia was nearly never used in books of “pedophilic” authors, for example not in “Loving Boys” and not in “Paedophilia. The Radical Case”.
From my point of view the text “After the Ball and After the Fall” gives the wrong impression that paedophilia and homosexuality are seperated things. Is a homosexual preference for 15-year-olds homosexuality? Sure. Is a homosexual preference for 10-year-olds homosexuality? Sure. Magnus Hirschfeld and gay activists seperated “normal” homosexuality from “unnormal” paedophilia. It will be our job to bring these two things back together in the public and scientific mind. The love between a 10-year-old boy and a man is just one thing in the real world so our words paedophilia and homosexuality are words and concepts that relate to one and the same thing in the real world.
And by the way in the recently published study “How common is males’ self-reported sexual interest in prepubescent children?” 97 % of those men who had a sexual contact with a child under 12 years had NO sexual preference for prepubertals. So the main topic is not paedophilia (prefrence for prepubertals), but the acceptance of the love and sexuality of children and acceptance of the love and sexuality of people of different ages. The sexual or emotional preference for prepubertals exists, but it seems it is quantitative much less important than mass media reports makes us believe.

Filip

Thank you Tom, very interesting.
According to the article “Beyond “Homophobia”: Thinking About Sexual Prejudice and Stigma in the Twenty-First Century” by Gregory M. Herek (http://glbpsychology.net/html/Herek_2004_SRSP.pdf) the word and concept homophobia was already very influential in the 1980is.

Decent GL

As always, it makes clear the differences between me and the rest of humanity (including pedophiles).
Honestly, what you say that pedophiles should not militantly defend his pedophilia, is probably what irritates me more than all of them, have a pathological hatred of anything that sounds military, religious, totalitarian, etc. which can be used to destroy the adultophiles. In short, anything but siting around fantasizing about pedophilia being homosexuality 2.0. If pedophilia were a army like the IRA or the PLA, an ideology like fascism or communism or a religion as the Davidians, I would have respected them, always. No fighting shows weakness, history has shown so if people go to fight, their instinct to see the war as a better quality will see them as better people who defends themselves and had honor (as do 100 % of living beings who defend themselves).
As for homosexuality, well, I repeat, is adultophilia, it was a civil war, therefore they have accepted them, just the war is over and won the homos, that simple, now they are (almost) a nation itself, see the parallels with other countries and their civil and ethnic wars? Pedophilia is not the same “race” that adultophiles, is like as aliens vs predator, adultophiles never, never, accept us, because we are not his “kind” we are enemies by nature, so every day more accepting of gays (same race) and oppress more pedophiles (different species).
The only way to get rid of the chains is … yes, you guessed it, declaring war on the adultophiles, and win, or get territory or to prove that if they mess with us they will pay them expensive their attacks, remember, we are a minority race between a genocidal war between races.
Besides that, why paedos are always looking society to accept them? society (and adultophilia) must be destroyed, they are evil, is a society where it is legal to kill babies, pornography poisons our souls, and the government sucks our blood and simply, human people make me sick, sex between adults disgusts me, I hate humanity, I do not want society to accept me, I’m antisocial, I want to come to power and force people to accept pedophilia like it or not, more authoritarianism is good for the this stupid planet.
And last, but not less important, people I know that is not are MAPs, even they are shocked when I tell them that pedophiles do not hate adultophiles, they say (with reason) why pedophiles can not hate and attack those who persecute them (the adultophiles)? and they make it clear that adultophiles hate pedophilia for the only reason of being adultophiles,simply that, you see? even adultophiles realize that it makes no sense to pedophiles to accept adultophiles. Adultophiles are our deathly enemy and also adultophilia is a illness and disease, is bad, is true, think what you will, the evidence is there.

mr pedo-man

War with adultophiles…Where does that leave the minor attracted, That are also heterosexual – And those homosexuals that are also pederasts, That would be most of them haha!…maybe no man’s land!
Recently there was an online article about a sex offender getting caught with child porn; I made the point that people are free to view an ISIS beheading, and that would not lead to the Police smashing their door down at 6am!
Many didn’t take kindly to those comments — I also mentioned the sex offences act 2003 has vastly expanded what is considered ‘child porn’ mentioning a cartoon can get you banged up.
Where i noticed i had the most up-votes was, in response to the usual castrate or throw on deserted island and Nuke it etc….Was my short comments like, Two wrongs don’t make a right, Or by resorting to violence, You are no better than this individual, and your reducing yourself to their level.
There was a good factual Drama last night: The Gamechangers, About the legal endeavours that the makers of – GTA: V — went through against their ‘moral’ opponents…’We send solders off to Afghanistan to get butchered, and all people worry about is a bunch of teenagers seeing a penis, Sex is normal, what’s wrong with this fuc***g country — All good stuff:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/proginfo/2015/37/gamechangers

Josh

I won’t be voting for Sanders. I don’t see leftist politics as being good for us, they never have been. The only correlation I’ve seen is the further we’ve moved to the left, the worst things have become for us. At least in the more conservative days people were less suspicious and there wasn’t the victim status-seeking of leftist feminism. There is really no reason for me to feel excited about anyone in politics but if I’m going to pick right now it would be Donald Trump. If for nothing other than the fact that he’s the only one who seems serious about tackling illegal immigration. He also has a strong personality and admirable confidence. He strikes me as a guy who would know how to get things done, whereas Bernie Sanderes comes across as being pretty weak and timid. It’s just hard for me to respect the guy especially after I saw him get bullied by blacklivesmatter activists in the most embarrassing fashion.
I don’t know. I’m not feeling the optimism. About 10 years ago pedophile online communities were pretty active and now it mostly feels dead. A lot of people I know ended up in prison, while some killed themselves, and then many more just gave up in frustration.

His name was Shame

Western civilisation has been gutted by Thatcherite free-marketeers and left-liberals, both sick guises worn by the devil of Internationalism. If Corbyn Harvester had his way all Cathedrals and BoyChoirs and Castles and STATUES would be broken apart, for they symbolise feudalism and then Empire. They already got rid of unanimous juries in this country, de facto in the United LGBT States, either way bad news for paedos, and then they got rid of the House of Lords, because they just don’t understand how a Constitutional Monarchy works. So, this is a culmination of the crisis of 1918 with Europe no longer in the hands of the capable men, all trust in traditional authority having been lost a long time ago.That said, it’s outrageious that Corbyn should have to defend his decision not to sing the National Anthem. I think it is pretty obvious why he didn’t sing it.
It is true that Corbynism is a challenge to the thieving Camerons who want to privitise everything, but it has been the case for a long time across the devleoped world that in order to get elected all the social issues which the left hold dear must be adopted by Conservative governments. Expect the same in the United States of Feminism and Incarceration, soon, when the Republican party will have to stop paying lip-service to so-called Family Values and adopt Gay Marriage and other totems of the New Disorder.
On Corbyn, I found it difficult to watch him at Prime Minister’s Question Time on account of hsi side-kick, the paederast-slayer Tom Watson, who was sitting beside him.
A good thing for paedos is that with a left-liberal government the prisons become extremely soft and constructed on the principles of brain-washing and rehabilitation. I saw a documentary on “the toughest UK prison” and it was an absolute breeze. I couldn’t believe it. Like a really bad hotel with terrible school meals. To think how for years as a teenager I was worried I would end up going to some awful prison for a decade if I so much as asked out a boy. Time wasted with hysterical worrying.

Josh

I think he meant in comparison with US prisons which are some of the worst. Of course prison sucks everywhere, nobody wants to be locked up and lose their freedom. Prison is especially bad for pedophiles I think since there aren’t any children. Plain vanilla homos get the best deal of going to prison since they are surrounded by people they find the most attractive. I mean, I wouldn’t mind overcrowding if the people I were overcrowded with were preteen girls. 😉

Decent GL

Tom, you also like young girls? I thought you only liked boys!

jpmeadows

‘…gazing (appreciatively?) at my “gallery”.’
I was working in an electronic (TVs, video [betamax/VHS] recorders etc.) goods shop in the early 80’s, when they decided to open the first video rental dept. in town.
Just down the road was a large prison and one of our regular customers was one of the establishment’s prison officers.
Every time he came in he’d grab one of our (admittedly “tame” in them days) adult titles, then come to the counter and surreptitiously ask me if I had (or could get hold of) any “under the counter” material? Unsure about such a request I passed it on to our shop manager. He told the officer: “we’ll see what we can do”.
On another occasion I was offered a customer’s teenage daughter if I could do him a good deal on some hifi equipment. Unfortunately, I was too shy in those days to press him on whether he was being serious or not, or for that matter, what she looked like.)

A.

A note (sorry!) about the boys’ choirs: Scandinavia, famed for its feminism, has plenty, as well as plenty of girls’ choirs. Single-sex children’s singing is healthier there than it is in, say, France, where efforts at re-establishing the maîtrises that were lost in the revolution have often produced mixed choirs with the inevitable preponderance of girls. And yet France is a fairly gendered society by comparison. Lots of factors go into this kind of thing.

Linca

Sounds like Tom got it really right on how bad prisons really are. My English friend upstairs doesn’t think Corbyn will ever be Prime Minister simply because the English like the Monarchy and will not give it up. I am kind of glad of that.
There is a building in the town I live in that is getting a newly designed roof that makes it look like a castle. It has been transformed from the ubliest building in town and become a really nice building to look at, gives me warm feelings. I live right in the middle of America. When I watched the movie ‘Doubt’ a few years ago the photos of the grounds of the Catholic School gave me nice feelings. Very comfortable reminders of my time at a Catholic School. Darn, the Priest was not interested in us boys.
What I am saying is there really is something comfortable in all the architecture both brick and morter and social we have surrounded ourselves with. They might get attacked but will return. Pedophilia is one of them. It will return. The reason: Pedophilia is Noble. Isn’t that what we are: Noble?
Love,
Linca
OH, The Lefty leader of our economic reform group over here is getting a PhD in Deviant Behavior. He is all in favor of us. L

Bloom

Be realistic: demand the impossible!

This is an interesting and important discussion. I’m conscious that fearful and hostile public responses to paedophilia are harnessed and deployed to further fascist agendas from the left and the right that have nothing to do with protecting children and much to do with social control. Reversing this trend isn’t just about making life livable for minor attracted people, it’s about reconciling social progress and personal liberty across the board.
Recently I stood up in a room of two or three hundred complete strangers at a book festival and made precisely this point (prefaced with the note that I don’t minimize the harm of sexual violence against children, which is true). My comment triggered a discussion that revealed I was not the only ‘member of the public’ who shares this view.
Also, while I agree with the cautionary note on coming out, especially in public, I’ve found that dropping the mask of ‘teleionormativity’ among friends can uncover genuine support, tolerance and understanding. It’s a question of judgment.

Christian

First, the link you give for “After the Fall” is erroneous:
https://tomocarroll.wordpress.com/archive.is/7c6pR
while it should be:
http://archive.is/7c6pR
I like “Heretic”, it evokes a dissenter, I always loved dissenters.
“Freedom only for the supporters of the government, only for the members of one party – however numerous they may be – is no freedom at all. Freedom is always and exclusively freedom for the one who thinks differently.”
said Rosa Luxemburg (https://www.marxists.org/archive/luxemburg/1918/russian-revolution/ch06.htm).
Many people are fascinated by the Cathars, the heretics of Southern France exterminated by a Crusade and then the Inquisition in the 13th and 14th centuries. Even the wording “pays Cathare” has been registered as a commercial label in the Aude department, and Catharism is used as a touristic attraction.

jpmeadows

A while back I pondered “what is freedom?”
At the time (and I haven’t totally dismissed this concept) I considered the proposition that maybe someone can only ever truly find freedom if they take their most ardent beliefs and renounce them totally.
This is often a very difficult proposal. I would suggest that if someone’s beliefs are built on research, understanding and intelligently argued debate, supported with relevant undisputable facts, then rejecting them would be nigh on impossible.
However, when beliefs are a result of gossip, emotion, and social/cultural coercion that demands the rejection of any facts for fear that they may question the narrative, well, I almost said it’s easier to reconsider those beliefs. Except, recent history would suggest otherwise – whether in relation to paedophobes or “Islamic State”.
On the other hand, it has happened from time to time. The most famous example of this might be this fella named Saul. Apparently he changed from someone with an “irrational” hatred of Christians (a minority group at the time, despised for their heretical beliefs) to become one himself. Of course it did require a hallucinogenic epiphany on his way to Damascus.
None the less, it can occasionally be seen without intervention from the guy upstairs. Not so long ago there was the report about the first gay marriage which took place in
Full Sutton Prison, East Yorkshire.
Somehow, regardless of any Christian denomination’s concessions to same-sex marriages, I think it unlikely that God was behind it: “And lo, the Lord God sent forth a bright light that brought great fear and anguish upon Mark. And the Lord spake to him, and bid him to lie with Mikhail so that they might pleasure each other intimately.” (Could almost be Michael Palin in “Life of Brian”.)
So it’s reasonably safe to assume that Mr Goodwin’s change of heart (quite literally) was inspired by more Humanistic considerations.
I hope that these musings might provide some encouragement for all of us. There is always hope that we might one day be able to stand unashamed… After the Fall.

94
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x
Scroll to Top