Just when you think you’ve seen it all, Salon.com posts this on their home page:
“I’m a Pedophile, But I’m Not a Monster” (byline) I’m attracted to children but unwilling to act on it. Before judging me harshly, would you be willing to listen?
Here’s the problem with the title and the byline: it’s misleading. The article is written by a pedophile who says he’s never touched a child and never would. The man, who identifies himself as Todd Nickerson, agrees that it’s wrong to both be attracted to children and to act upon that attraction. He then goes on a long diatribe about his past, the abuse he’s encountered, why we should be understanding in place of judgmental, blahblahblahblahblah. Finally, At the end of the long article is a call to action for pedophiles to get help, to seek advice and to find a solution to their sexual attraction to children. That’s not the argument here. It’s good that Nickerson wants other pedophiles to get help for their sexual desires. Not arguing with that. Okay? Okay.
BUT, the call to action of getting help for pedophilia is after Nickerson recounts his childhood disability, the time he was molested, and about being an outsider. Nickerson paints himself a victim in hopes of garnering your sympathy, and if you didn’t finish the entire article, the impression your left with is simply this: Salon.com is trying to normalize and de-stigmatize pedophilia.
To confess a sexual attraction to children is to lay claim to the most reviled status on the planet, one that effectively ends any chance you have of living a normal life. Yet, I’m not the monster you think me to be. I’ve never touched a child sexually in my life and never will, nor do I use child pornography…
Because the powerful taboo keeps us in hiding, it’s impossible to know how many non-offending pedophiles are out there, but signs indicate there are a lot of us, and too often we suffer in silence. That’s why I decided to speak up.
I’m sensing the need to add a disclaimer: I read to the end of the article. I do not think Nickerson is wrong in saying that pedophiles need help to prevent them from acting on their desires. Nor do I think it’s wrong that he illustrate why and how he came to realize he was a pedophile. It’s also not Salon.com’s responsibility to make people read to the end of the article. Okay? Okay.
My entire problem with the article isn’t with Nickerson so much as it is with Salon.com, for allowing the article to be framed in a misleading way, and titling it “I’m a Pedophile, But I’m not a Monster,” with a byline that calls for understanding and admonishes its readers for pre-judging someone who just admitting to being a pedophile. That‘s one of the problems with this article.
The first half of the piece is a tale of woe, where the reader is made to feel pity for this youngster who would grow up to be a pedophile (which the author accurately defines as someone who’s sexually attracted to children, not necessarily someone who acts upon it). Again, not against someone sharing their story here, my issue is how the story was framed.
If the first and only goal was for pedophiles to seek help, the article should’ve been titled: “I’m a Pedophile, I’m a Monster and I Got Help,” with the byline I’ve never once touched a child and never would. And neither should you. With the first paragraphs of the article beginning with the last paragraphs of the existing piece. Start with the end, let the readers know that Nickerson the pedophile isn’t in fact a monster who preys upon children, he’s the good guy who wants to help.
But that’s not what Salon.com did. Salon.com allowed the story to run as a formula: a poor child who was disabled, quiet, and alone was molested by an adult. He grew up to be a pedophile. He was misunderstood. He cloistered himself away. Takeaway? You should feel sorry for him. Also, active and proven child-molesters should be destroyed, regardless of religion, race, or status in life. If you molest children, you’re a monster.
Let’s remove the pedophilia aspect from this for a second and replace it with, say, racism. Would Salon.com run this article?
“I’m a Racist, But I’m Not a Monster: I’ve never discriminated against a black man and I never would. Before judging me harshly, would you be willing to listen?”
Probably not.
Do you also expect to see this article on front page of Salon.com?
“I’m a College Fraternity Brother and I Have Rape Fantasies, But I’m Not a Monster: I’ve never drugged or bound a girl and I never would. Before judging me harshly, would you be willing to listen?”
Verdict? No. No with seven different consent forms no. I thought about Googling it, but I was worried about the sorts of things that would pop up on my computer. So if this article has been written then I apologize to the rape-fantasizing frat guys out there…and to the writers who write about them. You are not monsters and need to be understood.
So here’s the bigger question: Are we living in such a time where Salon.com feels comfortable plastering an article like this on their home page? What does that say about our culture? What does it say about our culture regards sex? Because I don’t think I’ll see any article from a racist, sexist, or hell, violent felons who just wants to be understood, do you?
Again, not saying that people with sexual desires to children (who have never acted on them) should be strung up and hanged.
… But it’s getting close to the line. Sure, they should get help. But you know what? They’re sick, twisted people who are a danger to the children around them, and it’s not our job to coax them onto the couch so they can talk about their mommy issues…
I still have a steadfast rule: touch a kid sexually and you deserve a bullet.
This shocks you? Well let me ask this? If a pedophile touching a kid doesn’t warrant a red-line… what the hell does? The left wants us to be more concerned with inanimate objects like guns than the incredible liability of pedophiles. If I sound harsh, it’s deliberate. There’s a certain point you cross where I no longer care about your past, the injustices you’ve experienced or how little daddy hugged you.
Once you start sexualizing children, you’ve crossed that point. I’m sure some of you pedophiles have had some really tough breaks in life too. That’s sad. I don’t care. Once you become a threat to our kids (and yes, any sexual attraction to a 10 year old is to be seen as a threat), you are no longer welcome in society. Period. Gone. Done. No talking. No understanding. You’re out.
The only counseling session you get is with a cocked hammer and a three second count-down giving you a headstart to flee the village. I hope I’ve crystalized my position for you.
What do you think? Is Salon.com laying the foundation for something sinister, or have we just misread the intention of this completely? Maybe we’re just pedophile-phobic…
-Written by Steven Crowder and Courtney Kirchoff
Maybe, just maybe, Salon thinks that the whole idea of molesting children is so obviously reprehensible that it did not even occur to it that it actually had to say that?
What do you take us for anyway.
The only problem I have with this article is that you give three seconds.
Thank you Steven, for your diligence. Stupid people just keep piling up. But loud people like you give me hope. I actually shot one who crossed that red line with my baby. Love God, Never regret it.
Good for you! Too bad more of these pieces of trash haven’t been, violently, sent to meet their maker.
Omg, I am a victim, im 43 yr old f, all pedal need too be shot,that would help. I will never be over what that man took from me. And I would never want to do that to someone else nor do I get off on it. You need to find God.
After reading this I just wanted to jump up and cheer. Are you reading to much into salon.com’s intentions? Maybe. Is their title and settup misleading, absolutely. I loved this righteous fury! Leave no table unturned!
This is how is begins, I always wondered how it would. The final frontier in the forbidden leftist sexual galaxy? In a decade there will be a TV show, a lovable pedophile and his wacky friends will show the world they aren’t the monsters, it’s the people who won’t accept them. The kids love them unconditionally, why can’t you?
The fact that a site like Virtuous Pedophiles exists makes my skin crawl. There has been an ongoing campaign to remove pedophilia from the DSM as a mental disorder. There is a campaign to normalize this behavior. Children are not able to understand the consequences of and consent to sexual behavior. The left has sunk to disgusting levels of depravity.
No this is not a campaign to normalize this behavior. Did you even read the article? The author was quite clear that this is an aberrant orientation. He considers his own existence to be miserable, and that’s not because people don’t approve of him. He considers his sexual preferences themselves to be the source of his misery. He has never acted on his impulses.
Amazingly, there are people in this world who are capable of thinking about uncomfortable things like pedophilia, racism, or interest in sexual violence, and discussing them while strongly disapproving of them. As opposed to wingnuts like Courtney who just reach for their guns and threaten to start shooting.
Pedophiles exist. It is necessary to understand pedophilia and pedophiles in order to keep them from preying on innocent children. This means actually discussing the condition and the people who suffer from it.
Courtney is trying to foment some good old-fashioned grab-your-torch-and-pitchfork hysteria over the idea that liberals approve of pedophilia because they discuss it and don’t just execute pedophiles on sight. I see you happily went for it. People like you and Courtney frighten me.
He has never acted on his impulses.
And no, I’m not necessarily buying this. He has every reason to lie about this.
He could also be telling the complete truth.
But never mind the constitution, Steven and Courtney are all for driving this person into the desert to die alone. Whatever.
Oh the fucking irony. I had to pick carefully through their entire post to discover that this is what Steven Crowder and Courtney Kirchoff want to do to people like Todd Nickerson:
Once you become a threat to our kids (and yes, any sexual attraction to a 10 year old is to be seen as a threat), you are no longer welcome in society. Period. Gone. Done. No talking. No understanding. You’re out.
What do you think? Is Salon.com laying the foundation for something sinister…
No. You folks, on the other hand? You worry me.
My sister’s life and mine was destroyed by a pedophile who targeted us as kids. We’ve grown up unable to touch each other, even as adults. We couldn’t even hug each other for comfort after our mother died of cancer. I spent half of my childhood hearing her sob in fear during the night any time the house shifted, and neither of us were able to have children out of own due to the fear.
It’s certainly unusual that Gawker, News.com and The Huffington Post have run these kind of ‘think pieces’ over the last two years, always humanising the fucking monsters, never, ever, EVER talking to the children. But no, it’s apparently complete coincidence this is following the exact same pattern of how other degenerate behaviours were normalised.
So really Ellen, FUCK YOU, YOU VILE PATRONISING CUNT, and FUCK every elitist journalist saying we need to ‘consider’ and ‘discuss’ this . I hope you’re scared of us, because it’s wastes of lives like you who have failed every one of us children. The Overton Window is being shifted NOW, we can see it happening, and I refuse to stand for it any further. Everyone, start noting these articles and pass them on to every survivor abuse network. We need to organise. We need to march.
The majority of child molesters arent paedophiles, your sister was most likely abused by a none paedophiles
> Estimates for the rate of pedophilia in detected child molesters generally range between 25% and 50%.[99] A 2006 study found that 35% of its sample of child molesters were pedophilic.[100] Pedophilia appears to be less common in incest offenders,[101] especially fathers and step-fathers.[102]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophilia#Child_molestation
Obviously you’ve never been touched by a pedophile have you Ellen?
I’m sure after the experience the first thing you or your parents would want to do is try to understand the monster who did it? Or maybe if you had read an article written by a pedophile first, it wouldn’t have been so bad. So let’s make this article a mandatory read for all elementary age kids, so they will understand the plight of a pedophile and that will make it all better.
There is a campaign to normalize this behavior.
There is? Oh right, the NAMBLA folks.
You do realize that no one takes them seriously? That they’re pretty much universally despised? That LBGT organizations have adopted resolutions strongly condemning this group?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Man/Boy_Love_Association#Opposition_to_NAMBLA
But Courtney could not be arsed to provide us with this sort of information because she does not want any facts get in the way of her self-righteous hate-rant.
Children are not able to understand the consequences of and consent to sexual behavior. The left has sunk to disgusting levels of depravity.
“The left”, and third-wave feminism by the way, practically invented the idea that consent is a necessary condition for moral sexual behavior, in response to conservative insistence that it’s not. See: marital rape. For instance.
You almost seem to want to believe that liberals are trying to usher in an era of pedearasty*-tolerance. Why is that.
*pederasty: actual behavior, as opposed to pedophilia, an orientation. Learn the difference.
Me thinks thou protests too much. Good grief, how many posts are you going to write defending this piece. Now that adultery, promiscuity and sodomy have been normalized, the left only has the final frontiers of bestiality and pedophilia. Salon just thinks it’s the Starship Enrerprise off the sexual deviancy universe.
I am protesting, Skrellen, because of the patently false notion that discussing something is the same as approving of it. That taking any other stance than “shoot to kill” is somehow an indication of moral deficiency. That there exist a class of people that don’t have a right to due process under the law.
You think that someone like Todd Nickerson should have their rights restricted because of their proclivities? Great, fine, codify that into law.
But, as more calm than me have noted below, simply screaming “pedophile! shoot it!” solves only the problem of the pedophile you know, not the one you don’t.
And with that, I am stepping away from this discussion.
I am on the left (a social democrat), and I don’t really support Salon’s article or Salon generally – they are the fox news of the left. They just post controversial trash to get headlines.
With that said – it is possible that some people are attracted to children by no fault of there own. I feel bad for those people, but they should probably get help. And I am just not sure we should be destigmatizing pedophilia.
Salon is a disgusting magazine, and yeah, its goal might be to normalize pedophilia. But if that WAS its goal, it failed. It failed miserably. Because it allowed this guy to portray himself as a self-loathing person, fully aware of how disgusting and filthy his predilections are. He is an anti-pedophilia activist who happens to be a pedophile. A contradiction? Sure. In the same way it’s a contradiction when an alcoholic takes an activist role against alcohol abuse.
On that note: Are you also going to treat an alcoholic who stays on the wagon with the same contempt you treat an alcoholic who is actively abusing the substance, and also his/her family, and putting the public in danger by driving under the influence? Does an alcoholic who is fighting to stay dry deserve to be driven from society because of the risk he poses if he should fall off the wagon?
Because that’s the equivalent of what you’re suggesting. And it’s not fair.
And I say that as a survivor of child molestation.
AFAIK alcoholics who are on the wagon are often not too different than those who are off. Remember that sociopaths tend to be overrepresented among substance abusers. So there’s that.
KelZat – a mental disorder? More like a moral disorder. First of all, if a pedophile hasn’t molested a child yet, he/she will. They are a ticking timebomb. Second of all, I don’t believe for a minute that this “Todd Nickerson” is innocent of molestation. I just don’t believe it.
You have no evidence for that assertion, you just want it to be true to justify your hatred of the mentally ill.
To me, it’s really grotesque to compare a person who abuses children to a delusional schizophrenic who lives every day terrified of his/her hallucinations and unsure of what reality is. Classifying pedophilia as a mental illness is not only an insult to the truly ill, but provides a kind of unwarranted get-out-of-jail-free card–sometimes literally.
“We wrestle not with flesh and blood but against the despots, powers, and Master spirits, the rulers of this present darkness.”
We don’t need to pull a gun on those who are possessed by spirits of paedophilia, we need to get an exorcist involved.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Left
Herbert Marcuse and his “New Left” adherents would be proud of Salon for featuring this piece on their home page. Look up his 1955 book titled “Eros and Civilization”.
For some context of what I am referring to:
“According to Leszek Kołakowski, Marcuse argued that since “all questions of material existence have been solved, moral commands and prohibitions are no longer relevant”. He regarded the realization of man’s erotic nature as the true liberation of humanity, which inspired the utopias of Jerry Rubin and others.”
“I’m a Racist, But I’m Not a Monster: I’ve never discriminated against a black man and I never would. Before judging me harshly, would you be willing to listen?”
I see articles like this all the time. No I am not going to do your homework for you. Just google it already.
I am a racist. You are a racist. We are all racists.
I am not proud of my racism, because I’m not actually a horrible person. The people who write for and comment on this site, you folks wear your racism on your sleeves and expect not to be judged for it. And you point to other people who struggle to understand and control their racism as criticize them for it? Seriously???
Eh, speak for yourself. This sounds like a silly tu quoque argument to me.
I agree with the deconstruction, all those who expose pedophiles are then ‘targeted individuals’ by our own government, which tellsyou everything you ned to know and how many traitors we have. Erol’s the world’s leading light on these monsters and our osts are invariably followed by them stalking our comments, as they believe they can hide in plain view. This is Erol’s latest article exposing them.
http://christlike.be/2015/09/erol-exposes-sex-offenders-addicted-to.html
Kind of an aside from the whole article, but I wanted to point out the rape fantasy goes both ways. I, for one, actually have fantasies about BEING raped. I’m sure were it to actually happen, it’s not quite what my fantasy entails. Sexual fetishes and kinks are an odd thing, and one that is massively misunderstood due to the mentioned social stigma.
I dunno. Just saying.
Fuckin’ around with kids is no bueno, though. Even in prisons, child molesters are often kept secluded from the rest of the wards and the reason for their imprisonment is often kept a secret—because even lying, stealing, racist murderer sees a child molester as the scum of the Earth.
Rape fantasies are common. Either as perpetrator or victim. And as you say, very misunderstood.
This is why we talk about these things. Instead of just going off half-cocked. So to speak.
This man’s writings remind me of another man’s writings. Joseph Edward Duncan III wrote, “I learned that most people who prey on children have discovered that adult-child sexual relations are not in and of itself a bad thing, and does not in and of itself cause harm to the child (assuming no physical injury has been inflicted).” He worked it all out in his mind that he wasn’t bad, but meanwhile he killed 5 people, including raping and killing two young boys and raping 9 yr. old Shasta Groenig before he was jailed.
Salon will have to forgive me for not believing that someone is harmless just because they say they’re harmless. This is disgusting and evil. They want us to sympathize and tolerate, the slippery slope is alive and well. You notice that the bulk of his argument is that it’s just an orientation like homosexuality, and people used to think that was wrong, too. They said conservative Christians were crazy for saying that this was the next goal for the left. Welcome to the brave new world.
You did not read the article if you think the author approves of adult-child sexual relations.
Or rather, you read the article but your brain inserted things that weren’t there.
Why don’t you try again.
“Salon will have to forgive me for not believing that someone is harmless just because they say they’re harmless.”
Prisons are full of harmless people. Just ask any one of them.
He has shitty thoughts and now he’s – i think? – seeking help. As long as he keeps it to himself where it belongs that’s all that matters. Convicted child predators SHOULD be run out of the village, if they’re lucky.
Thank you. If he has horrible thoughts that’s not a crime. If he actually rapes a child, then that’s a problem.
Forgot to add: Horrible shite thoughts are not crimes. No one can be charged with thought crimes. It’s what you do that matters.
Yes. Thank you. But the authors of this post (Steven Crowder and Courtney Kirchoff) are taking this a big step further and saying that non-offending pedophiles should be run out of the village.
Editors write headlines to grab people’s attention and get them to read the article. Sometimes that means writing things that look a bit “off”, so that potential readers will stop dead in their tracks and click on the link and read the article. That’s what you see here. Nothing more.
No there is not actually a sinister leftist plot to normalize pedophilia. Understand it, control it, prevent it. And yes, feel sorry for the poor bastard who suffers from it.
Which is apparently what Steven and Courtney have their dander up about. That we’d feel sorry for this poor guy, and our pity for him would prevent us from shunning and ostracizing him.
Start with the end, let the readers know that Nickerson the pedophile isn’t in fact a monster who preys upon children, he’s the good guy who wants to help.
Start with the end. Know that Crowder and Kirchoff* is are in fact monsters who want to override the constitution and who advocate vigilante justice because they get their rocks off on that sort of stuff. And so should you.
*Mostly Kirchoff. I recognize this bullshit.
The only difference between a pedophile and a child molester is one did and the other one will. The cure for both is a bullet.
ellen, seriously, do us all a favor and go back to where gays propagate in the streets while so called transgendered boys dance while throwing handfuls of flower petals in the air as the guiltless liberal politicians sit silently by smoking piles of weed and smashing fetus heads.
And leave those of us alone who DO NOT and WILL NOT sit by and feel pity for the monsters known as pedophiles.
We get it, we understand that the “only” thing the author was trying to do was to get it out in the open. In fact we agree……but for different reasons.
The author is downplaying the MENTAL ILLNESS and is seeking sympathy. The author claims to have never acted but how are we to know this? How many drug users, thieves, rapist, killers would openly confess to those acts?
The same mouth that you use to demand tolerance for gays, transgenders, and this author is the same one used to promote intolerance for those who hold beliefs contrary to your own.
Your intolerance is no different than those you accuse of mindless bigotry. I suggest YOU go soul searching, oh perhaps soul isn’t a word you identify with. Do some inner examination and fix yourself before you come into a forum and bash others for their points of view
Yes, you overreacted. Mr. Nickerson says over and over in the article that he’s non-offending, celibate, and against sexual contact with children. The article subtitle states right up front that he’s “unwilling to act on” his attraction to children. Your complaints about the article’s sequence and framing are overblown. The article requests that the reader take a few minutes to listen to his story, and your only complaint seems to be the order in which he told it because not everyone will read to the end.
I thought it was an excellent article. We need to acknowledge that some folks are stuck with sexualities that are persistent, that they didn’t ask for, and where they will forever have to suppress their sexual urges. They need help, unless we want to get into the business of executing people for sexual attraction that they NEVER ACT ON.
You and I and the other commenters here should be thanking our lucky stars that we didn’t get handed this particular problem, and we should be supportive of pedophiles that seek help. In our current society, even acknowledging you are attracted to children can ruin a person’s life. We need to make it easier, not harder, for these folks to come out of the darkness and get help. As Mr. Nickerson said, “a repressed, unhappy pedophile is a pedophile at risk.” And that puts children at risk.
I think he made a good point though that you wouldn’t see the title: “I’m a racist but I’m not a monster.” On salon.com.
Shows the order in which they rank horrid things.
I’m sure the Internet argument experts already pointed that out, but I personally don’t think you can compare racism and fantasies to pedophilia.
Pedophilia is a mental disease. As far as I understand the formal definition, it’s that you can’t get attracted by anything that’s not a children. There isn’t any of the million of weird fetishes out there that work for you, only one thing works.
Most people are not psychopaths, have empathy. If it’s true they can’t get arousal from anything else than children, it’s hell. They’re trapped, forever, because there is no cure. It’s like, you don’t try to cure a homosexual. I don’t like this comparison because some people do like to put homosexuality somehow next to pedophilia where there is a big difference in morality here… Sex between consenting adults and sex with children being that difference. But in essence if you’re a men who likes men, you can’t “change” that. It’s just you.
Is racism a mental disease? Well you can make your own theories, science is open on all subjects, but there is no scientific consensus that would put racism as a mental illness. So no, they do not compare. An Internet argument expert would have called sophistry or some shitty term like that.
Now I understand your point about how you would have done the tone and structure of the article, it works for me. It’s their editorial freedom to frame it otherwise though.
There are arguments in favor of destigmatizing pedophilia, it’s learning about it. That can help prevent disasters and lifetime traumas for other children. IMO, it can be worth it.
Should confessed pedophiles be under surveillance? Probably yes. I think it’s natural they should not be allowed to be in jobs where you’re around children the whole day… And they should have very frequent visits to a therapist, yes. There should be control here, but exile and shame? I don’t know man. Forcing this illness into the unknown doesn’t help the science or anyone that really wants to try something, to find a “cure”. They’re not even given a chance.
Thank you for this, John. But I should warn you, the authors of this post do not care about nuanced and sensitive discussions of difficult topics. They want to get straight to the “Shoot them all while heaping mockery at the liberals who want to stop us” part.
Just so you know.
Do you think it’s possible that a person could grow up to be a racist but feel bad about it because of circumstances in childhood? Also could someone grow up to be a pedophile and feel bad because of circumstances in childhood?
Mental illness or not would salon.com ask for sympathy for a racist? I think that was his point. Or at lest part of it.
I remember all this stuff as a teenager in the eighties.The attempt to normalise paedophilia as an orientation. As an economically left leaning person, it’s clear to me that identity politics and moral relativism has rendered much of the left not only irrelevant, but downright abhorrent.
The assumption that sex is mechanical, purely physical and does not involve any moral or spiritual dimension means that yes, paedophilia is just an ‘orientation’. But we all know it isn’t. If you fantasize about children you wallow in a sexual dynamic of pure power, greed and lust. I don’t like it one bit, I don’t think it’s right, I couldn’t care less if you had a tough childhood (so did I, awwwwwww) and I’m not going to change.
Most SJW’s appear to be adults mired in their OWN childhood and unable to grow up and accept that others (children) are more vulnerable than them. It’s all adolescent whining ME, ME, ME.
So spend your adulthood mired in self pity, abdication of responsibility and ignoring the plight of the less fortunate. BECAUSE YOU MATTER.
I watched someone I love dearly completely destroyed by paedophiles when she was a little girl of five years old. She is female. She doesn’t forgive and neither do I.
This is a good comment. For one thing, yes, there are a lot of psychological and cultural factors involved in sexuality that most people just can’t be bothered to examine and explore deeply. The purely mechanistic view of sex is disingenuous.
And for another, I too am tired of seeing people in a position of relative strength or power being completely unconcerned with the lives of some of the least powerful people in our society, like kids.
I would upvote this if I could.
I loved this follow up you have written Mr. Crowder….
Just like in the past, there were people who had different sexual orientations who were kept in the closet, the Leftist have always attempted to make Homosexuality “Normal” well for me it is not and never will be.
And yes there are those on the left who want to force everyone to accept anything Obama Care, Forced fines, and so on, there has been an attack on the average family for years, Where Mom and dad existed now they want to even change the way we parent our children, like this woman,
Julie Bendal who want heterosexuality to disappear. her Quote: I mean, I would actually put them all in some kind of camp where they can all drive around in quad bikes, or bicycles, or white vans. I would give them a choice of vehicles to drive around with, give them no porn, they wouldn’t be able to fight – we would have wardens, of course!
Women who want to see their sons or male loved ones would be able to go and visit, or take them out like a library book, and then bring them back. read here: http://www.radfemcollective.org/news/2015/9/7/an-interview-with-julie-bindel
The same with the above mentioned article they want to Normalize the abhorrent behavior of sexualizing children….Salon is part of that system and yes the way they titled it is very misleading.
Yes in my heart of hearts, These pedophiles should be executed, they are predators who steal the innocence of our children, the Vatican is the largest protector of the pedos, look at how many priests got away with their acts of perversion,
So basically we need to shoot all pedos. I’m fine with that.
So basically to sum up your article, you dont believe we should hang paedophiles just for being paedophiles but we should shoot them just for being paedophiles.
So when does that begin, should we kill all paedophiles including paedophile’s when they’re children? Also you realize as a so-called libertarian you support thought crime? Because paedophilia is nothing but thoughts. You’re a hypocrite.
So if someone has desires for young children, is conversion therapy available? I agree that some child molester should be punished for their crime. If someone’s just having pedophilic thoughts, not so much. I don’t support the whole idea of thought crime.
Well nice to know that you would be willing to murder someone, even though they have never acted on it, never will acted on it, and that science has established that sexual attractions is out of people’s control.
You’re really reaching with this article.
The thing that this whole debacle reminds me of most is that scene in “M” where Peter Lorre is attempting to explain away his crimes with the whole “uncontrollable urges” schtick. Eerie to realize that that was in 1931.
F*CK THE C.F.R.
I am late to a fairly sane conversation because I was side tracked laughing at articles proclaiming “liberals” as a whole we’re supporting/pushing for the normalization of pedophilia due to a piece published by one source for the New (read happily self censoring and real dumb) Regressive Left. Like any of us vote on what websites publish. That said…
I had a lot of problems with the frame work, but what is new? Most titles have absolutely nothing to do with the focus of the actual story. While I think it is important to promote therapy for those who have not acted on unhealthy urges (prison if you have), I did think it put far too much emphasis on victimhood. But again… What’s new? That is the Regressive Rally Cry. One now cries victim over anything. I was not happy with the suggestion that an attraction to young children is an orientation. At this point, I’m surprised non peanut lover is not listen an orientation but… My problem is, the DSM makes it clear that pedophila is a mental illness. A clerical error a few years ago listed it as an orientation but it was caught and quickly corrected. I have to question someone who claims to be in therapy but freely classified this as a (really horrible) orientation. That or I must question their therapist. To then relate it to being gay should be given the side eye by any liberals (I know) as well. Equating all gay men to child predators was quite the fashion during the early 80s, after the AIDS panic eased up a bit. But again, this is the REGRESSIVE LEFT. The comments were the biggest cluster of all. I have never seen so many idiots telling people they were heartless because they would shun their hypothetical best friend who had spent tons of alone time with their children and then “came out” to you, in confidence, as a hypothetical pedophile. One does not “come out” to child molestion. They confess but yet again the whacky PC’er’s are trying to redefine beyond all logical explanation, and legal definition. At this point I just hope it keeps going backwards until it disappears.
Do you think Obama’s last act before annuling the 2016 election and declaring himself Antichrist, will be to appoint a national panel comprised of recently flown-in Pashtun tribesmen to advise him on all matters involving paedophilia? Nothing like bringing some professional opinions into the debate now, is there?