Eek! A Male! Pedophile hysteria hurts and kills children

Imagine, putting ointment on a 3 month old’s vagina.  Every man is a suspect for pedophilia. Soon no father will dare to change his daughter’s diapers. Avid consumers of child abuse books on Amazon have a dirty mind. 30 years ago, before the pedophilia hysteria, the idea of abusing a 1 year old would not even have crossed the mind of 99.99% of males. Very rare a man would have sexual thoughts when dealing with a nude toddler.  Just as absurd as thinking of sex with a dog, a cat, a duck, or a car muffler.  It was just a non-issue.  Now such ideas about toddler sexuality pollute everybody’s mind, law enforcement, and societal habits.

Consider the Iowa daycare center where Nichole Adkins works. The one male aide employed there, she told me in an interview, is not allowed to change diapers. “In fact,” Ms. Adkins said, “he has been asked to leave the classroom when diapering was happening.”

Now, a guy turned on by diaper changes has got to be even rarer than a guy turned on by Sponge Bob. But “Worst-First” thinking means suspecting the motives of any man who chooses to work around kids.

[…]the British Musicians’ Union warned its members they are no longer to touch a child’s fingers, even to position them correctly on the keys? Or that a public pool in Sydney, Australia last fall prohibited boys from changing in the same locker room as the men? (According to the Daily Telegraph in Sydney, the men demanded this, fearing false accusations.)[…]

And that’s not the worst. In England in 2006, BBC News reported the story of a bricklayer who spotted a toddler at the side of the road. As he later testified at a hearing, he didn’t stop to help for fear he’d be accused of trying to abduct her. You know: A man driving around with a little girl in his car? She ended up at a pond and drowned.

We think we’re protecting our kids by treating all men as potential predators. But that’s not a society that’s safe. Just sick.   Eek! A Male! (Wall Street Journal)

Wait, there is more! This article continues! Continue reading “Eek! A Male! Pedophile hysteria hurts and kills children” »
Eek! A Male! Pedophile hysteria hurts and kills children
» continues here »

Michel Temer (70), new Vice-President of Brazil was 63 when he married Marcela Temer at age 20. Borderline Pedophilia or healthy human sexuality?

Marcela Temer- Vice President Michel Temer - Dilma Toussef The second lady of Brasil, Marcela Temer (27, born May 16 1983), wife of the new Brazilian vice president Michel Temer(70, born September 23, 1940), called attention for her extraordinary beauty. She was elected Miss City of Campinas 2002 and secone place Miss São Paulo State 2002.

According to newspaper reports they are happily married and deeply in love. They married in 2003, when she was 20 and he was 63. Marcela Temer - Vice President of Brazil Michel Temer

Marcela Temer MARCELA-TEMER-COM-MICHEL

Human-Stupidity Analysis

Dangerous pedophile vigilantes who cheer German Dad, 47, for castrating the boyfriend, 57, of his 17-year-old daughter certainly would violently object such an age difference as indecent, immoral and borderline pedophile . Marcela clearly is a “victim”, in need of judicial help.

After all, when they married, she was 20, he 63.  He could easily be her grandfather.  If she were 3 years younger (17) and he were 40 years younger (23), in the USA, the land of the free, this would be  considered pedophilia, worth of a decade in jail. Even if they had no sexual relationship, he could face criminal  charges for grooming her.  And notice, in the case of the german dad who castrated the boyfriend of his daughter, there is no mention of sexual relationship.

Marcela states that it is as if her husband were 30 years old (Estadão newspaper)

In Brazil, nobody thinks that the young wife of a much older extremely successful politician is a victim. Certainly many young women would love to be in her place. Maybe something is wrong with our sexually-obsessed religious morality.

Victim dupes man into raping her. How can you rape without knowing you are raping?

An intelligent, fully conscious young man committed rape without knowing he was raping. He had no clue he was raping. How can you rape while thinking you are not raping? Do you know the answer?

Man unknowingly rapes girl because she deceived him.
Man deceived by girl into unknowingly raping her.

The answer is:

Man who had sex with girl, 12, admits rape but is freed after woman judge says he was ‘duped’ into thinking she was 19

A barman who admitted having sex with a 12-year-old girl walked free from court after convincing a judge she had tricked him into believing she was an adult.

Michael Graham, 25, met the girl through a social networking website on which she had posted pictures of herself and described herself as a 19-year-old student and single mother who enjoyed drinking and having sex.

The girl was inundated with offers from men, but only replied to Graham because he was the best looking, Leeds Crown Court was told.

You guessed wrong? you still haven’t gotten it: consensual sex can be rape. If a 12 or 15 year old happily hops into your bed, or if you drag her into the bushes and hold a knife to her throat, in both cases you commit the same crime “rape”.

This is a special case of “rape by deception”. The “rapist” was deceived.

Wait, there is more! This article continues! Continue reading “Victim dupes man into raping her. How can you rape without knowing you are raping?” »
Victim dupes man into raping her. How can you rape without knowing…
» continues here »

“Watching child porn victimizes the child”. The Voodoo science of child pornography laws

  

“However, what he didn’t turn his mind to at the time is that merely having possession and viewing images such as this does victimize and hurt the individual portrayed in the image. He appreciates that now.” Senior gets jail time, probation for having single image of child pornography 

We at Human-Stupidity.com fail to appreciate that. Maybe we are too humanly-stupid to understand. Or maybe we do not fall prey to mystical superstitious thinking that is the driving force of the child porn witch hunt

merely having possession and viewing images such as this does victimize and hurt the individual portrayed in the image.” This is some mystical religious thinking. Like in Voodoo. And note, this was said by a respectable lawyer to appease a judge. And this logic is used over and over, for example by Australian Government web sites. 

Vodoo logic

Child porn Voodoo logic

voodoo-doll-pinYou stick a needle into a Vodoo doll’s arm. The person you curse will be hurt on the arm.
The vodoo doll symbolizes a person, and that person’s will get injured in the same place where you stuck the needle.
Someone possesses a photo of a child, in the form of 0’s and 1’s in a computer file. When s/he looks at the photo, the individual depicted in the photo gets victimized and hurt.
 

Voodoo logic applied to murder and terrorism

exhusband-vodoo-doll While I can appreciate that creating or distributing child porn victimizes children, I cannot agree that looking for, viewing, or collecting child porn actually victimizes anyone. If you were to apply the same reasoning to any other crime, then looking at a photo of any crime would be re-victimizing someone. Using the same reasoning, anyone who looks for, views images or video footage of 9/11 or nazi war crimes, or autopsy photos, etc, would be guilty of having re-victimized people. If the simple act of viewing an image of someone is harmful, then perhaps an approprate punishment would be to simply take a photo of the perpetrator in jail, then set them free, but have some look at the photo that was taken while they were in jail. ”
Dude” commenting at  
Examining the Effects of Child Pornography

VoodooDoll Dude, you are hilarious. Having people look at photos of themselves in jail to re-victimize them with their jail term. Priceless! 

Studying child sex offenders isn’t easy. […] It’s hard because sexual offenses against children are without a doubt the most culturally, emotionally, and politically charged of all offenses, particularly in North America, and researchers (and journalists) who are willing to take a more objective, critical, and/or scientific view of these offenses and offenders, are often attacked for their trouble. Take one of the questions the Swiss study considered: 

Are people who consume child pornography different from those who sexually offend against a child?

So far so good. Open minded article, wants to seriously analyze child porn issues. But wait: now he falls under the voodo spell, too:

Many may feel like this distinction isn’t worth making. Watching child pornography is, in several ways, offending against a child even if the viewer never comes in physical contact with a child. Certainly watching child porn is a re-victimization of the child in the film.    Examining the Effects of Child Pornography 

We were seriously doubting our sanity. Maybe we at Human-Stupidity, like Mr Smith who had one single CP photo, really need our misguided brain repaired. Even if we don’t consume child porn, maybe for purely educational purposes, to remedy our human-stupitiy, we should join Smith’s “probationary term that will require Smith to take part in the province’s sexual offender assessment and treatment program” (Senior gets jail time for single image of CP

Maybe we, at Human-Stupidity.com are the only dumb insane people in this world who don’t understand this infallible logic: “Certainly watching child porn is a re-victimization of the child in the film”.  

But the spell was broken, and our trust into our sanity was re-instated, when we ran across this irreverant and refreshing comment 

“Certainly watching child porn is a re-victimization of the child in the film.” 

Are you mad? 

Looking at ‘indecent’ images of children is no more a ‘Sex Crime’ than looking at an image of a dead person is ‘Homicide’. (“Dr Nigel Leigh Oldfield “commenting on Examining the Effects of Child Pornography

Hence 

one could just legalise ownership [of child porn] and solve the problem in one fell swoop 

Certainly our mind gets victimized by repeated exposure to insane voodo logic 

Certainly watching child porn is a re-victimization of the child in the film”.  

This repeated exposure almost destroyed our trust into our own intelligence. Somehow constant repetition of voodoo logic brainwashes the average person into believing such NONSENSE: “Certainly watching child porn is a re-victimization of the child in the film”.  

Unfortunately, the belief in this nonesense guides entire nations’ and the United Nation’s policy towards the world wide child porn witch hunt

Australian Law Makers’ logic

Analogy #1

Analogy #2

Not a victimless crime: The accessibility of child pornography or child abuse images on the Internet raises the question of the relationship between the viewing of such images and actual child abuse off-line by the offender concerned. It is agreed that the very act of accessing child pornography makes the offender a party to child sexual abuse. As the UK Sentencing Panel observed: ‘Possession of child pornography is not (as some have argued) a victimless offence’. [2.5]  Child Pornography Law (New South Wales, Australia) Not a victimless crime: The accessibility of child abuse images on the internet 
 

  • infant shaking, infant beating, infant throwing caught on nanny-cams
  • children suffering serious injuries in accidents
  • children being knocked out in fighting sports like boxing and Thai boxing

raises the question of the relationship between the viewing of such images and actual child abuse off-line by the offender concerned. It is agreed that the very act of accessing child abuse videos above makes the offender a party to child sexual abuse. As the UK Sentencing Panel observed: ‘Possession of child abuse videos as above is not (as some have argued) a victimless offence’. 

Not a victimless crime: The accessibility of  depictions of terrorism, mayhem and murder on the Internet raises the question of the relationship between the viewing of such images and actual terrorism, mayhem and murder off-line by the offender concerned.  It is agreed that the very act of accessing depictions of terrorism, mayhem and murder makes the offender a party to terrorism, mayhem and murder. As the UK Sentencing Panel observed: ‘Possession of depictions of terrorism, mayhem and murder is not (as some have argued) a victimless offence’. [2.5]   

  

Human-Stupidity.com Analysis

We understand your rage

We understand that some readers will be fuming with anger, reading our “defense of pedophiles, child abuse, and child abusers”. We almost fell prey to the world wide child porn hysteria voodoo logic brainwashing. It is based on 2 fallacies 

  1. confusing the crime with depiction of a crime:
    You watch a movie of a plane flying into the World Trade Center. Therefore you are a terrrorist and revictimizing 3000 people who died
  2. Confusing child pornography and “child pornography”. Confusing “child porn” as defined in the old days (involving a “real child under 12” and “real porn with real penetrative sex” and “modern child porn” which might be as harmless as a 22 year old (that looks “apparently underage” like she might be only 17 years old) non-nude in leotards dancing while gyrating her hips provocatively). Can you understand now we insist that lots of modern so called “child porn” has no victim at all and is not offensive to sex positive people.

  

Can watching a photo or video cause harm to a far away “victim” that is unaware of the watcher?

  

Wait, there is more! This article continues! Continue reading ““Watching child porn victimizes the child”. The Voodoo science of child pornography laws” »
“Watching child porn victimizes the child”. The Voodoo…
» continues here »

Age of Consent is Misandry (jayhammers.blogspot.com)

The arbitrary age of consent is not about protecting women/girls. It is about valuing females and their virtue over males and their freedom. The intent of the laws is to stop older men from having sex with younger women and that is how it is enforced. It was never intended to stop younger men from having sex with older women. This is only possible in a society that values females over males, the same society that has so many other examples of legalized discrimination based on sex as long as that sex is male – violence laws such as VAWA, domestic violence laws, family court, accusations of sexual assault & harassment, all criminal sentencing, military conscription, circumcision, etc. We live in a society where misandry runs rampant, unchecked, and enforced by the law.

RIP Jayhammers.blogspot.com

Jay Hammers closed down his famous Men’s Rights blog, jayhammers.blogspot.com for private reasons. Unfortunately, he did not just cease to publish, but took down the entire blog. With Jay Hammers gracious permission, I repost Jay Hammers “Age of Consent is Misandry”.

Jay Hammer’s “Age of Consent is Misandry” is a provocative, politically incorrect and irreverent article. The language is often strong and alienated even lots Men’s Rights’ activists.

We at Human-Stupidity.com repost  Jay Hammer’s “Age of Consent is Misandry” as a historical document, without further comment. We do invite comments at the end of this post!

  • reddit.com/domain/jayhammers.blogspot.com has the history of his blog, including lots of reddit’s members comments. We would be happy if Jay Hammers gave permission to repost more of his articles.
  • Human-Stupidity.com is not exclusively dedicated to men’s rights. Human Stupidity focuses on exposing blind dogmatism, unjust witch hunts and wants to raise awareness and honest conscious discussion. Sometimes the truth is offensive, sometimes a point that counters conventional dogma can be driven home with blunt openness instead of careful maneuvering.
  • * r/mensrightsmovement: Reddit Men’s Rights Movement

    • www.reddit.com/r/mensrightsmovement/ is a new group at reddit, and an appropriate place to advance the discussion of issues about this post. r/MensRightMovementWelcomes sex positive points of view” and “Sees the legislative creep of sex offender hysteria to be one of the greatest abuses of men’s rights by feminists.”

    Age of consent laws are designed to punish beta males. A beta male in his 20s, unsuccessful with women his own age who are infused with a sense of feminist entitlement and deride all but the top alpha males who take interest in them, who seeks companionship with a younger, sexually mature female who desires him, should not go to prison for acting on that which is normal male sexuality. A society that criminalizes this is a society that values females over males and treats women as if they are children.

    If we are to treat women as children then we should be consistent. Young women who have sex with older men are as much victims as women who have sex with a pick-up artist after meeting at a club. In both cases, feminists are angry because the woman has been “fooled” into having sex with a less than ideal mate in terms of value. In the first case, the male appears to be of higher value than he really is because he is older and more experienced. In the second case, the male appears to be of higher value than he really is because he has learned the elements of attraction. In both cases, women are presumed (by feminists) to have no responsibility for their own actions and to be little more than children, than animals who are guided only by instinct.

    Wait, there is more! This article continues! Continue reading “Age of Consent is Misandry (jayhammers.blogspot.com)” »
    Age of Consent is Misandry (jayhammers.blogspot.com)
    » continues here »

    Sex laws traumatize 14 year old school boy who was happy to have affair with 26 year old woman

    A mother-of-two caught naked in bed with a 14-year-old schoolboy who bragged about the affair on Facebook has been jailed.  Susanne Divers, 26, befriended the boy after meeting him at a party and later began an affair that lasted more than a month. He was so smitten he boasted on the website: ‘I’ve got the best girl in the world.’— Read more: Mother of two, 26, is jailed after being caught naked in bed with 14-year-old schoolboy lover (Daily Mail)

    It is pretty clear how this 14 year old boy was damaged by the woman predator. So much that he bragged all over, and wanted to commit suicide when she tried to break up. The repressive teenage sex laws were to blame for the breakup attempts. So the laws actually are detrimental to teenagers.

    Over 200 comments to the above article agree mainly that the law is wrong. Most commenters would not have the courage to say that the law is also wrong if the “victim” were female happily agreeing and consenting to a relationship with an older guy.

    If society were not so totally convinced by the dogma of gender equality, then it would even be worth analyzing if there should be different measures for both sexes. Some fathers might actually be proud if their 14 year old son had an affair with a 26 year old woman, but most parents would be much more concerned if their 14 year old daughter had an affair with a 26 year old man. Maybe human instinct is a better guide then equality laws.

    Food for thought.  Form your own opinion.

    Disclaimer (Female privileges or equality)

    My comment in the left column did not intend to alienate men’s rights activists. But I got flak by some highley esteemed activists who thought I was betraying them because am favoring privileges for women.

    This quick comment was a suggestion to open-mindedly consider different alternative thoughts, not a dogmatic statement or final solution. Human-Stupidity is about awareness and anti-dogmatic attitude, not about definite dogmatic solutions.

    See also the comments below for alternative ideas and interpretations.

    I am not in defending the the actual system:

    • whenever it behooves women, they have equal rights
    • whenever it is advantageous, they have unequal privileges

    Rather, in order to have old fashioned female privileges in one place, they would have to accept old fashioned male privileges elsewhere. Actually

    • I am against the dogma of the sexes being totally equal (they are not)
    • I am against excessive, unnecessary and draconic interference by law makers and courts into private matters, sexuality

    See yesterday’s post about the father who castrated his teenage daughter’s lover.

    Dangerous pedophile vigilantes cheer German Dad, 47, for castrating the boyfriend, 57, of his 17-year-old daughter

    alg_bread_knife

    Helmut Seifert, 47, an ethnic German originally from Russia, was enraged when he heard his 17-year-old daughter was having a relationship with Phillip Genscher, 57.

    He went to police in the town of Bielefeld where he lives but officers said they were powerless to intervene.

    “The man then recruited two work colleagues at his factory and then went to the house of the victim,” said police.

    “The man was forced to remove his trousers and, fully conscious, he was castrated. The severed testicles were taken away by the perpetrator.”

    The man was close to bleeding to death but managed to call police. His life was saved but he remains a eunuch for life. […]

    He told police: “I received a phone call anonymously that my daughter was involved with a guy 40 years older than her. You said you couldn’t stop him – so I did.

    “I saw it as my duty as a father.”

    German man castrates teenage daughter’s 57-year-old boyfriend (The Telegraph)

    This was republished here Dad, 47, in Germany castrates man, 57, for dating 17-year-old daughter (NY Daily News)

    • Note: nowhere did the article say that the couple actually had sex with each other
    • even if they did, the age of consent in Germany is 16, there is absolutely no legal problem
    • keep reading to see the murderous scary comments by the NY Daily News Readers
    • So a harmless man is mutilated for having an affair with a much younger but legal woman, and the good citizens cheer and want to join the lynching

    Naomid

    2:59 PM
    Dec 13, 2010

    Why is everyone calling this guy a perv?? He was DATING the girl, not raping her! If an 18 year old guy was dating her, would you call him a “perv”?? Remember, Charile Chaplin married his wife when he was 54 and she was 17, and they had 8 kids together and stayed married for 30 years until his death, and she never remarried and is now buried next to him. Is that being a perv? If anyone is a perv, it’s a psychopath who cuts off *****. What do you think that is going to do to his daughter? She is going to be terrified to get into any kind of relationship again.

    Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/forums/thread.jspa?threadID=118502&start=80&tstart=0#ixzz18gndinDh

    Compare:  Michel Temer (70), new Vice-President of Brazil was 63 when he married Marcela Temer at age 20. Borderline Pedophilia or healthy human sexuality?

    Interesting discussion among the NY Daily News Readers

    here

    Dangerous vigilantes

    Cheetaralysa

    5:50 AM
    Dec 17, 2010

    Good for him! as a father it is his duty, parents need to protect their children. a 57 year old man dating a 17 year old he sounds like a child molester. I cant believe most of your responses protecting this pervert! America has gotten soft and that is why our country allows child molester books to go on sale on Amazon.com! regardless of the statuatory age limit in Germany russia whatever the mind of a 17 and a 57 year old dont match. the father did what he did and didnt even give up his boys…i salute him. that pervert will be scarred for life, im sure he molested other young girls guaranteed. america stop being soft.

    Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/forums/thread.jspa?threadID=118502&start=160&tstart=0#ixzz18gutleNJ

    kitty62862

    2:02 PM
    Dec 13, 2010

    Why? A 17 year old has zero emotional maturity; won’t for about 10 more years. There is no way on the face of this earth that man isn’t out for totally fresh tail. Do that to my baby, pray that I only castrate you. We’ve taught her well, but someone who is determined sometimes succeeds. There’s no way that relationship is ok. No way. At 17, you are still legally responsible. I called my husband to tell him about this. This is what he said: “You help me, then cut yourself a plea deal and testify against me” We love our daughter, end of story. It is not ok at 17. It is not ok under 25. Period.

    Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/forums/thread.jspa?threadID=118502&start=40&tstart=0#ixzz18gh3mZdE

    iluvbball

    12:24 PM
    Dec 13, 2010

    Good for him, at least this child molester wont harm anybody else’s child.

    Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/forums/thread.jspa?threadID=118502#ixzz18gdgiW00

    sadtruth

    1:10 AM
    Dec 15, 2010

    I don’t blame him for doing that to a 57 year old parasite. She may be a siren but she’s young and still much the immature adolescent. The old man ought to have known better than take advantage of this woman. He’s lucky that all he lost were his *****…

    Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/forums/thread.jspa?threadID=118502&start=160&tstart=0#ixzz18gvlxMlo

    Wait, there is more! This article continues! Continue reading “Dangerous pedophile vigilantes cheer German Dad, 47, for castrating the boyfriend, 57, of his 17-year-old daughter” »
    Dangerous pedophile vigilantes cheer German Dad, 47, for castratin…
    » continues here »

    Hanna Rosin on the rise of women (TED talks)

    Quite a shocking speech. Hanna Rosin fails to mention the constant discrimination against men and boys, and against masculine traits and behaviors, from kindergarten on.

    But, judging from her speech, men clearly need to be protected and have affirmative action, as a disadvantaged class.