We are not pedophiles. We have no interest in children or their indecent depictions.

We make extreme efforts to not run afoul of any law, not even by mistake or accident 1 2 3 .

We are interested in truth, free academic research, in protection and happiness for children 5.
We are against unnecessary witch hunts that demonize and imprison people with unnecessary rigor and that criminalize a huge percentage of the (male) population.


The biggest of all taboos: to research, study or discuss adult-child sexuality.

We have been warned. We will be called pedophiles. We may suffer vigilante action. We may suffer government prosecution. We should not mess with the topic adult-child sex.

Yes we are talking about real children under 12 years of age, not just 17 year old adolescent young adults, re-defined as "children" by feminist dogma and by the *United Nations.

The Rind Study serves as a warning: a prestigious, peer reviewed meta analysis, published in one of the most prestigious journals of the American Psychological Association: probably the only piece of peer reviewed academic research condemned by unanimous vote by both the United States Senate and Congress.

The authors’ stated goal was “…to address the question: In the population of persons with a history of CSA [child sexual abuse], does this experience cause intense psychological harm on a widespread basis for both genders?” Some of the authors’ more controversial conclusions were that child sexual abuse does not necessarily cause intense, pervasive harm to the child;[3] that the reason the current view of child sexual abuse was not substantiated by their empirical scrutiny was because the construct of CSA was questionably valid; and that the psychological damage caused by the abusive encounters depends on whether the encounter was consensual or not.  Wikipedia on Bruce Rind 

The US Senate and Congress have decided, once and for all, by dogmatic fiat: "child sexual abuse" is is extremely traumatic under all circumstances.  Academic research must not arrive at any different conclusions.

Such a shocking interference of religious and moral zealots with scientific truth has not happened since Galileo Galilei: a few centuries ago, the catholic church decreed the "scientific truth" that the sun revolves around the earth.

The Trauma Myth

Susan Clancy inadvertently stumbled over the unpopular truth, as published in

The Trauma Myth: The Truth About the Sexual Abuse of Children–and Its Aftermath .

All hell broke loose. I was bombarded with accusations that I was hurting victims even more than they already had been and that I was a friend of pedophiles. I was also vilified by many in my own scientific community. Some colleagues and graduate students stopped talking to me. A well-meaning professor told me to pick another research topic because I was going to rule myself out of a job in academia. Some felt my research had a political agenda, one biased against victims. I was invited to give a talk about my research at Cambridge Hospital—home of the tremendously influential sexual abuse treatment program Victims of Violence. No one from the program showed up. Clancy (pp. 77-78).

Researchers refuse to discuss issues in a seminar?! The most convinced adversaries never counter with true research, with true arguments?

This is the sad state of affairs. A dogma does not need to be discussed scientifically. The Bible has the definite answer. The US senate made the scientific decision.

And Human-Stupidity has the insanity to question and analyze the dogma.

 

Human-Stupidity is open to science. Just prove me wrong, using science.

  1. TruthWillSetYouFreeIf unbiased free academic research can show that 17 year olds get traumatized for life for having sex with older people, we will support age-of-consent laws.
  2. If the Rind study, and Susan Clancy can be proven wrong, by free unbiased academic research, we will support draconian decade-long punishments for all childhood sexuality. 
  3. We would stand corrected if the voodoo theory could be proven true, by free unbiased academic research: if it were proven that looking at photos of lightly clothed 15 year olds, downloaded for free from the internet does irreparable harm to the minors depicted. If that harm is so perverse that looking at the photos ruins the model’s life forever. And that downloading free photos truly stimulates the rape and abuse of innumerous children. Then we might agree that life in prison without parole is a proper punishment for possession of a few hundred photos, which are nothing else then 0’s and 1’s in files on a computer hard drive.

But against all odds, Milton Diamond, in peer reviewed research, proved the opposite: freely available child pornography reduces sex crimes against children, because many pedophiles can satisfy themselves merely by perusing pictures.

 

Certainly, scientific research should not be manipulated and repressed by religion, feminism, or personal feelings. It is relevant to understand Robert Kurzban‘s description of how people invent non-existing victims to justify their pre-conceived opinions.

 

You creep! Adult-child sex is disgusting and wrong! Period.

I don’t disagree. You have all right to protect your children. Or to promote laws that criminalize adult child sex. BUT

  • Don’t falsify academic research to further bolster your claim and to justify an absurd police state with extreme draconian punishment. Base your policy on free unbiased science.
  • And don’t break the law engaging in vigilante action.
  • And don’t prosecute and punish thought crimes like manga drawings of child sex, or possession of Homer Simpson cartoons. Nor persecute and harm law abiding pedophiles like Jack McClellan.
  • And join me in my fight against the dangerous child obesity epidemic that kills and sickens Millions of children and adults every year. Let us fight REAL child endangerment that truly hurts children, instead of protecting children from trumped up imaginary voodoo theories.

 

Why do you obsess, or even care about adult child sexuality and child pornography?

  • We were born and trained in scientific method and curiosity.
    • We learned the scientific research method: form hypotheses, test them, find alternative explanations, devise tests to verify or disprove these alternative explanations.
  • We have a firm belief that it is important to know the truth. Positive illusions, false beliefs, and religion are often useful for individuals,  but not as a method of science.
  • We have compassion.
    • We see the damage that is being done by the child and teenage sexuality witch hunt and the child porn insanity.
    • Similarly to the war on illicit drugs, thousands go to jail unnecessarily and hundreds of millions get criminalized
    • Yes, a considerable percentage of adolescents have sex before 18 year of age. In states without Romeo and Juliet laws,  every single instance of such sex is a felony    * Girl 13, charged as sex offender and victim at the same time
    • We are in favor of respect for the law. Few, clear, necessary laws that are respected. How can one respect senseless laws that make a large percentage of the Californian population felons. 99% of them go unpunished while a small percentage gets their life ruined with draconian prison sentences followed by life long sex offender registrations for crimes like having sex with his future wife.
    • Yes, forensic analysis could find suspicious child porn on almost any computer, especially by the European and Australian rules of "apparently underage" child porn which includes barely legal young looking 18 year olds and small breasted 23 year olds with pony tails.
    • This spreads fear and terror in the populace
    • It might be a civil rights issue, an undue restriction of children’s liberty, that it is a felony for children and adolescent to to engage in consensual sexual behavior, or simple doctor play
  • Most accusations against teachers in Wales are dropped : this is why we obsess with this. To prevent innocents from being terrorized.  If true non-forcible child abuse is not very traumatizing, then abuse accusations would not be so extremely serious. The potential abuse would be treated as a medium transgression, not as worse then murder. Then teachers would not be so terrorized by a simple accusation, be it true or false.
  • There is a limit to truthfulness:

 

We believe that neither the Bible nor the  US senate or US congress are sources to scientific knowledge and truth

We at Human-Stupidity are fanatically interested in the truth.
  • We don’t accept dogma, even if the dogma supported and enforced by the US Congress and Senate . Even when threatened with prosecution for thought crimes, our curiosity and quest for truth does not stop.
  • We are driven by curiosity. We want to know the truth. At any price.

Admit it you pervert: you are a pedophile, you want to abuse our pre-pubescent children! Why else would you defend pedophilia and child pornography?

We have absolutely no interest in pre-pubescent children.

We are not even "law abiding pedophiles" like  Jack McClellan. Jack McClellan is a self professed pedophile who admits sexual attraction to 8 year olds, but explains that he does not act on his attraction because he is a law abiding citizen.  This was enough for him to get restraining orders, threats, humiliation and aggression at the Steve Wilkos talks show. His naïve honesty pretty much ruined his life.

We are normal healthy people that have no sexual interest whatsoever in pedophilia. No sexual interest whatsoever in pre-pubescent children.

Only those who don’t engage in illicit behavior can afford to publicly defend Child Porn or child sexuality

If we were engaging in any illegal child sexual pursuits, or even just interested in collecting child pornographic images, we would be wise enough to shut up.

Nambla (North American Man Boy Love Organization) members have suffered arrests and prosecution. Many of Nambla members actually engaged in actual pedophilia, or consumed child porn and thus were vulnerable to arrest and prosecution. Now they wisened up and keep a low profile. Even their web site nambla.org is not easily accessible (Google is your friend if you want to try). I will refrain from linking to it, though Nambla.org actually has some interesting articles.

We take extra precautions to stay away from all underage minors

To avoid any potential misunderstanding, trouble, or intentional CP entrapment,  we ID check any friend, visitor, or client that looks under 35 years of age. Thus nobody under 18 years of age would ever get close to us. Except when accompanied by a responsible parent, with proper ID. Yes it is embarrassing when I have to kick out a friend’s underage brother or sister. Yes it is sad that we refuse to teach professional skills by tutoring a bright 16 year old boy, even with parental consent. Self preservation is important, especially when outing ourselves with such heretic writings.

 
 

Why would one "defend" pedophilia if one is not a pedophile?

  • Why would one oppose medieval witch hunts, if one is not does not believe in sorcery and is not interested in witchcraft? 
  • Why would high ranking police and law enforcement be in favor of liberalizing drugs if they don’t consume drugs? 
We oppose imprisonment of harmless people for victimless crime

We would like to keep prisons free for violent dangerous criminals. We don’t see the need to cruelly lock up for non-violent people who copy files in the privacy of their home. We oppose overcriminalization.

 

Free scientific research from emotional and religious barriers

We don’t need to falsify science to prohibit the sale of dog meat

Is it necessary to falsify and prevent scientific research to justify penalties for indecency with children? Are people afraid they can not justify the draconian laws if the truth be known? Why are people afraid that damage will be done if academic researchers are allowed to say the truth, without political interference (see Rind Study and Susan Clancy),

We prohibit the sale of dog and horse meat. We don’t need to invent false science about the terrible danger of eating dog meat. We can prohibit dog meat for sentimental reasons, without hiding behind junk science. But there are no decade-long prison sentences for illegally selling dog meat.

We believe if the lies get uncovered, the manipulative language removed, punishments should be much less severe.

Child porn laws prescribing punishment for possession of pictures or possession of drawings should be revised. Or rather unceremoniously scrapped. Let freedom of expression and freedom of press prevail.

We want science to inform us how to best protect the well being of children

We want to protect children: Legalizing child pornography reduces child sexual abuse, as Milton Diamond has proven conclusively. We are more concerned with child food porn, junk food promotion that really leads to chronic disease and premature death in hundreds of million people world wide.

Lots of child pornography is nothing more then adolescent erotica(copine scale, Knox vs. USA) with 17 year old "children". Children get victimized not so much by child porn itself, but by child pornography and sexting prosecution.

People get punished with years, decades 1, or life in prison for having copies of computer files that consists of 0’s and 1’s. While pictures of child mutilation, child murder, shaking babies to death are common staple on YouTube.

Share

18 Comments

  1. Columnist says:

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    The Christian Right is the main culprit. The Atheist Left occasionally produces books like “Harmful to minors” by Judith Levine.
    Aiding the the Christian Right are White Nationalists, who have the misguided idea that laws against pedophilia will jail (powerful) Jews and Muslims.
    Actually, I am beginning to think that the Christian Right and the Atheist Left are far more dangerous to the interests of white men than either Judaism or Islam.

  2. luminess air reviews says:

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

    I read a story recently about a man who accidentally downloaded a picture, He reported it to the police as he was honest. They have taken his kids away until they investigate further. Careful what you click on! luminessairreviews.biz

  3. jewamongyou says:

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    Yes, and if you oppose the War on Drugs then you must be a user of drugs yourself. As a matter of fact I am; just yesterday I had a cup of coffee.

    If you support the right to bear arms, you must own a gun yourself. Hopefully so.

    If you support the Fourth Amendment, you must have something to hide. Don’t we all.

  4. Columnist says:

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

    The only way the insanity can be ended is by introducing a new religion that strikes at the heart of political correctness.

  5. Andrew says:

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

    Hah ha ha…

    Most all under 11 girls go topless on all West European, East European & “Russian” beaches & resorts for generations. Tens of millions of European families spend part of their 1 to 2 month vacations on nudist clothing optional beaches around the World with their teenage daughters and pre-pubescent daughters exposed to unrelated Middle-Aged men (many with thoughts or more) occuring under the hat or newspaper on the lap…. for generations. Photons entering the Man’s iris are just the same physics element whether radiating off a piece of glass, or plant cells on a wood pulp paper polaroid snaphot or animal cells on a naked girls body at the clothing optional beach.

    Surely this can be dealt with as previous Centuries have dealt with it? Menopausal women hating males looking at anyone else but themselves & man-hating certain kind of Lesbians & politicians that cater to that marginal feminazi swing vote for job security while they molest (often) under 18 prostitutes supllied by organized crime collusion with Governmental agencies, Bohemian Grove, Operation Monarch, whatever.

    Nothing new here.

    Just to ban for the peons any intergenerational sex or romance.

  6. Renee says:

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    To me, the problem with child pornography is whether the guys who get off on it work with kids or are around children a lot. Is there research saying that guys with child pornography and pedophilia are more likely to act out on their desires, or less likely? Because really, I would feel rather queasy if a male teacher had pedophilia on his home computer.

    Why would one oppose medieval witch hunts, if one is not does not believe in sorcery and is not interested in witchcraft?

    Well, I’m a Christian and I can understand opposing medieval witch hunts if it consisted of executing innocent people who have nothing to do with witchcraft. In fact, I’m would be against any form of witch hunts period regardless of whether people participated in witchcraft or not. As long as they didn’t kill anyone in their practices.

  7. admin says:

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

    It is very clear that pornography reduces violent sex crimes against women. And

    Legalizing Child Pornography reduces child sex abuse crimes (Scientific study by Dr. Milton Diamond, U. Hawaii)

    Just the Puritans don’t like the results of scientific research

  8. &raquo The Child Sex Trauma Myth #1 says:

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    […] Source and the rest of the story: http://human-stupidity.com/stupid-dogma/teenage-sexuality/the-child-sex-trauma-myth-1-you-must-be-a-… […]

  9. Jack says:

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

    Michel Houellebecq summarised it well in one of his novels (The Possibility of an Island, I think) when he said the campaigners against child pornography have never been after the real paedophiles. Their targets all along have been the men who get aroused by post-nubile teenagers. The men who want to look at children (= pre-nubile bodies) are a vanishingly small fraction of the male population. I would even bet there are many more women into children because women have always had an attraction for children as such. 99.99% of men want fuckable (=nubile, grown-up bodies).

  10. Mike says:

    Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 5

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

  11. admin says:

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

    This is what you have been indoctrinated to think. Please read more about a title=”Child Porn witch hunt” href=”http://human-stupidity.com/irrationality/stupid-dogma/child-porn-witch-hunt” target=”_blank”>child porn witch hunt.

    Especially read about Milton Diamond’s research.

    Example: 17 year olds photographing themselves in the mirror. Child porn, but no child abuse

    7 year olds nude at the beach: child porn, but no child abuse

    Department store children’s swimsuit catalog: when in a child photo collection of a private person: child porn, but no child abuse.

    Finally: a true child abuse porn photo from the 1960’s: child abuse has happened, and nothing can be done about it. The photo still can help a pedophile to act out his desires in the privacy of his home, get his pressure off by masturbation and thus reduce the pressure to actually molest real children.

  12. Christian says:

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

    I am mostly in agreement. The laws which prohibit children and young adults from having sex, even though consensual, and the laws against possession of child porn (however defined) are bad for our society and almost entirely without merit, especially when viewed from a scientific perspective. I really don’t understand why we even have such laws and attitudes, as I cannot see any benefit to society. But where I question your arguments is where you blame religion, Christianity especially, for this state of affairs. I am a Christian, and a student of the Bible, the book which defines what a Christian ought to believe. I can confidently assert that the Bible says not a word against children having sex, either with adults or with other children. The requirement of marriage is present, but there is no age limit on marriage, nor any age difference limit. In fact, there are places in the Bible where God gives his approval of child marriage. Jewish tradition was that a girl could be sealed in a marriage covenant through sexual intercourse at age three. Most Jewish girls were married well before they reached today’s minimum legal age. Anybody who invokes the Bible as a reason to prohibit sex with minor adults or children either does not know their Bible, or they are lying.

  13. Larner says:

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

    Typical myth, CP was originally designated as something that involves in actual and sometimes violent sexual activities with pre pubescent children.

    But somehow over the years it has been re-defined into nudity or any “sexually suggestive” image of a person under the age of 18 or sometimes even a person who “appears” to be under the age of 18

    Just like the Knox case, there wasn’t anything illegal in the video, it contains teenagers dancing in tights. The only thing illegal in this case is that he was zooming in on the breasts and butts.

    Inappropriate? YES

    But going to prison? HELL NO

    Just by zooming into a picture makes it illegal is just terrifying

  14. admin says:

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    Sorry for screwing up, not approving comments for a while.

    YEARS of prison for zooming into ass, breasts or genitals of fully decently dressed adolescents. Worse, Knox did not zoom, he possessed videos with the zooming. Maybe the zoom even excited him.

    According to researcher

    Milton Diamond 

    , looking at these inoffensive videos might help Knox to stay away from real adolescents.

    Also, I keep stressing that for a normal, decent, law abiding citizen, one day in prison, being branded as a felon, are terrible punishments. It would not even need years in prison.

  15. Christian says:

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

    This paragraph above just caught my attention:
    “Yes, a considerable percentage of adolescents have sex before 18 year of age. In states without Romeo and Juliet laws,  every single instance of such sex is a felony…”
    It’s a common misconception that 18 is the universal age of consent. In the USA at least, only a small minority of states have an AoC of 18, with most states having set the age at 16. In a few states the age was recently raised from 14 or 15. In other countries the age varies (last I heard) from 12 to 21. Of course if the purpose of such laws was to prevent dangerous sexual activity, the laws would all agree on the age, which would be scientifically determined.

  16. Pedophilia everywhere, in 1970ies Europe | oogenhand says:

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    […] “The Sun”. 11 to 15 year old Brooke Shield’s nude photos were everywhere. (Disclaimer). The German Green political party had a committee that favored liberalization of adult child […]

  17. Shooter Elliot Rodger: Could prostitutes placate wrath of lonely male virgins? | Human Stupidity: Irrationality, Self Deception says:

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    […] Peer reviewed scientific research by Professor Milton Diamond conclusively proved that access to porn and, yes, even child porn take the edge off natural or perverted sex drives and thus clearly reduces sex crimes. (Disclaimer) […]

  18. Ian Thorpe: I’m finally comfortable saying I am pedophile. I like 17 year old young women [Satire] | Human Stupidity: Irrationality, Self Deception says:

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    […] All these sex laws are based on politically correct junk science that invents trauma where there is one, and upon political repression (Rind study) of peer reviewed science that finds that consensual underage sexuality is harmless even at shockingly low ages (disclaimer). […]

Leave a Reply