Legalizing child pornography

is linked to lower rates of child sex abuse

"Pornography and Sex Crimes in the Czech Republic" Archives of Sexual Behavior. The official publication of the International Institute of Sex Research

Study carried out in Czech Republic confirms similar results in Japan and Denmark

Results from the Czech Republic showed, as seen everywhere else studied (Canada, Croatia, Denmark, Germany, Finland, Hong Kong, Shanghai, Sweden, USA), that rape and other sex crimes have not increased following the legalization and wide availability of pornography. And most significantly, the incidence of child sex abuse has fallen considerably since 1989, when child pornography became readily accessible – a phenomenon also seen in Denmark and Japan. Their findings are published online today in Springer’s journal Archives of Sexual Behavior.

The findings support the theory that potential sexual offenders use child pornography as a substitute for sex crimes against children. While the authors do not approve of the use of real children in the production or distribution of child pornography, they say that artificially produced materials might serve a purpose.

Diamond M et al (2010). Pornography and sex crimes in the Czech Republic. Archives of Sexual Behavior. DOI 10.1007/s10508-010-9696-y  eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2010-11/s-lcp113010.php

Video (must see)
Hawaii Researcher Studies Effects Of Child Pornography.:Says Porn Lowers Sex Abuse Of Children. (must see Video)

As part of his research Diamond also looked at countries that have recently made child pornography illegal and said the rate of child sex abuse there is rising.

Original Paper: Pornography and Sex Crimes in the Czech Republic (HTML)

Original Paper: Pornography and Sex Crimes in the Czech Republic (PDF)

The findings support the theory that potential sexual offenders use child pornography as a substitute for sex crimes against children.
Source: Legalizing child pornography is linked to lower rates of child sex abuse

Amazingly a politically incorrect study made it past the radar and actually got published. We are against dogmatic Human-Stupidity. We favor unbiased free research to find the truth. Human-Stupidity.com is in no way devoted to the goal of defending child pornography for its own sake. BUT

Of course, only human-stupidity.com would dare to publish such a scientific result without backpedalling. The mainstream press, scared of the child porn witch hunt climate, has the compulsion to add caveats.

Charity’s anger at proposal to make child porn legal ‘to protect children from abusers’ (Daily Mail)

The proposal, by Professor Milton Diamond from the University of Hawaii [to legalise child pornography in a bid to cut the number of child sex abuse cases], follows a study which shows that child sex crimes fell when child pornography was legalised in the Czech Republic.  [...]  The research found that child sex crimes fell when child pornography was more easily accessible. The discovery tallies with similar studies in Denmark and Japan, where child pornography is not illegal, that found incidences of child sex abuse were lower in those countries.

The conclusion of the new study is that ‘artificially-produced’ child pornography should be made available to prevent real children being abused.

The normal press has to instantly counter academic research with the emotionally driven, manipulative unscientific drivel by charities and NGO’s.

But child protection charity NSPCC today said the idea was ‘wrong’.

Chris Cloke, the charity’s NSPCC head of child protection awareness, said: ‘This obscene type of material has no part to play in our society.

‘Many children suffer atrocious abuse in the making of indecent images.

‘To make it legal, would suggest that inappropriate behaviour and violence towards children is acceptable. It never is and it would be quite wrong to make it legal.’
Charity’s anger at proposal to make child porn legal ‘to protect children from abusers’ (Daily Mail)

Change.org sucks & censors had to instantly campaign emotions against science and actually won censorship (as was to be expected in the actual political child porn witch hunt climate):

Update: The University of Hawaii denounced this recommendation after receiving letters from 250 Change.org members. University of Hawaii Professor Recommends Legalizing Child Porn (Change.org)

Due to loud protest by change.org “human trafficing” campaigns, academic scientific research was censored with no need for scientific rebuttal by academic peer reviewed research.

University of Hawaii Denounces Legalizing Child Pornography

After receiving 250 letters from Change.org members, the University of Hawaii has denounced the legalization of child pornography. Members began voicing their concerns after a retired University of Hawaii professor released a study that seemed to advocate for legalizing child pornography in order to reduce child abuse. Now, however, university officials have stated they don’t support that policy recommendation.

Dr. Milton Diamond, a University of Hawaii professor who retired in 2009, used his university credentials when he published his recent study Pornography and Sex Crimes in the Czech Republic. In it, he studies the legalization of adult pornography in the Czech Republic and concludes that when adult pornography was legalized, sex crimes against adults did not increase. It also claims that when child pornography was made legal, sex crimes against children decreased.

Of course, science can be countered with science to the contrary. Maybe what Dr Milton Diamond found has scientific flaws.  Let academic research prove him wrong. But scientific research should not be invalidated by petition of lay people.  Of course, nowadays, only persecution-supporting scientific studies are published, because talking in favor of liberalizing child pornography or teenage sex is academic suicide. Dr. Milton Diamond has tenure, is old and retired, it still is amazing he got his study published.

Human-Stupidity.com suggests to create a anti-change.org site that counters change.org’s repressive petitions with petitions to the contrary, presenting scientific evidence about manipulated data etc (PS: we are referring mainly to the human trafficing and other feminist data falsifying parts of change.org)

Abstract and excerpts of the original Research Paper

Original Paper: Pornography and Sex Crimes in the Czech Republic (HTML)

Original Paper: Pornography and Sex Crimes in the Czech Republic (PDF)

Abstract Pornography continues to be a contentious matter
with those on the one side arguing it detrimental to society
while others argue it is pleasurable to many and a feature of
free speech. The advent of the Internet with the ready availability
of sexually explicit materials thereon particularly has
seemed to raise questions of its influence. Following the
effects of a new law in the Czech Republic that allowed
pornographytoasocietypreviouslyhavingforbiddenitallowed
us to monitor the change in sex related crime that followed the
change. As found in all other countries in which the phenomenon
has been studied, rape and other sex crimes did not
increase. Of particular note is that this country, like Denmark
and Japan, had a prolonged interval during which possession
of child pornography was not illegal and, like those other
countries, showed a significant decrease in the incidence of
child sex abuse.

Findings ouside the Czech republic

Kendall (in press) conducted an in-depth analysis of possible
relationships between society, pornography, rape and
the Internet for the state of California. Kendall found that the
arrival of the Internet, while not seeming to have an effect on
other crimes, was associated with a reduction in rape incidence.
After checking the results for the effects of the extent of
porn use, user marital status, size of city in which potential
rapists might live, possible economic status, and other social
and demographic features, Kendall concluded that ‘‘potential
rapists perceive pornography as a substitute for rape…pornography
is a complement formasturbation or consensual sex,
which themselves are substitutes for rape, making pornography
a net substitute for rape.’’This conclusion reflects on the
earlier findings of Goldstein et al. (1971). These investigators,
having extensively interviewed and surveyed rapists, pedophiles,
and others alongwith control groups of personswith no
history of sex offenses about their use of pornography, found
that sex-offender and sex deviate groups not only have had less
experience with pornography but when they do come across it
‘‘…report a higher incidence of masturbation in response to
eroticmaterials than the controls.’’They go on to conclude that
‘‘the erotic materials are much more significant in producing
masturbatory reaction in the users compared with the controls
than in inducing sexual relations.’’

It is also noteworthy that the number of paraphilias (e.g.,
indecent exposure) decreased significantly following the
ready availability of SEM. Usually such activities are considered
relatively refractive to change. Here again, we believe
potential infractions in this regard were prevented by the
simple expedient of masturbation. We believe our findings
support the displacement function of pornography for potential
sex offenders.
Issues surrounding child pornography and child sex abuse
are probably among the most contentious in the area of sex
issues and crime. In this regardwe consider instructive our findings
for the Czech Republic that have echoed those found in
Denmark (Kutchinsky, 1973) and Japan (Diamond&Uchiyama,
1999) that where so-called child-pornography was readily
available without restriction the incidence of child sexual
abusewas lower thanwhenits availabilitywasrestricted.Aswith
adult pornography appearing to substitute for sexual aggression
everywhere it has been investigated, we believe the availability
of child porn does similarly. We believe this particularly
since the findings of Weiss (2002) have shown that a substantial
portion of child sex abuse instances seemed to occur, not because
of pedophilic interest of the abuser, but because the child was
used as a substitute subject.

Summary of feminist utterings about pornography

Among the most prominent expressions against pornography
are in the works of Dworkin (1981) and MacKinnon and
Dworkin (1988). These women are so convinced of the negative
effects of such materials they believe they ought to be
restricted in availability and made illegal. On the other hand,
there are many women in favor of sexually explicit materials
(SEM) or at least against its censorship (McElroy, 1997; Newitz,
2002; Strossen, 1995; Tiefer, 1995). The anti-censorship
and pro pornography side of the argument holds that pornography
is an expression of fantasies that provide pleasure
(Christensen, 1990), are media that can inhibit sexual activity
(Wolf, 2003), and materials that can even act as a positive
displacement activity for sexual aggression (D’Amato, 2006;
Goldstein, Kant, Judd, Rice, & Green, 1971).

Adult Pornography reduces sex crimes

Individuals in real life could use the material alone in private or with partners. In real life, individuals can elect to experience some pornography for minutes or hours, at a single session, or over years. In real life, individuals are free to satisfy different sexual urges in ways unavailable to students in classroom or subjects in laboratory situations.

Kutchinsky (1983, 1987, 1992,1994), has discussed the relative merits of lab studies compared to events outside the laboratory. Basically Kutchinsky believes that pornography, in the real world, offers a substitution for the sexual and nonsexual frustrations that might, in other circumstances, lead to sexual offenses (Kutchinsky, 1973a). He wrote:

If availability of pornography can reduce sex crimes, it is because the use of certain forms of pornography to certain potential offenders is functionally equivalent to the commission of certain types of sex offences: both satisfy the need for psychosexual stimulants leading to sexual enjoyment and orgasm through masturbation. If these potential offenders have the option, they prefer to use pornography because it is more convenient, unharmful and undangerous. (Kutchinsky, 1994, pp. 21).

This too we believe is only a partial answer. There is also the liklihood that repeated exposure to SEM can lead to a response of habituation, boredom or fatigue.

Source: “The Effects of Pornography: an international perspective,” by Milton Diamond, Ph.D, Portions of this paper have been published in the International Journal of Law and Psychiatry (Diamond and Uchiyama, 1999-22(1):1-22.)

More literature

Pornography, Rape and Sex Crimes in Japan. Author: Milton Diamond, Ph.D. and Ayako Uchiyama Published: International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 22(1): 1-22. 1999

• University of Hawaii Professor Recommends Legalizing Child Porn (humantrafficking.change.org)

Amazon’s Next Child Sex-Abuse Firestorm Involves Photos [By The Book] (jezebel.com)

First a story about a toddler that had to die because a man was afraid to help, due to the pedophilia hysteria.

An extreme defense of pedophilia

There was one small detail that jumped out at me in the tragic story of Abigail Rae, the two-year-old who wandered off from her village playgroup and ended up dying in a garden pond. Tucked away at the end of yesterday’s inquest report was a line about how Clive Peachey, a bricklayer, drove past a child on her own, whom he later concluded had been Abby.

She was not walking straight, she was tottering, said Mr Peachey. “I kept thinking should I go back? One of the reasons I did not go back is because I thought someone would see me and think I was trying to abduct her.”

The hysteria over paedophilia hangs like some dark cloud over almost every interaction nowadays between a man and a child that isn’t his.

Source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/3352895/Day-of-the-dad-paedophilia-hysteria-leaves-men-afraid-to-help.html

Professor Mirkin got himself into deep trouble defending that consensual sex with an adolescent is not the same as raping the same adolescent. Similar to a Dutch law, Professor Mirkin contends that the age of consent should be 12 years, as long as the adolescent’s consent can be proven.

Click on MORE to read the rest of the story.

Death threats over paedophilia article

Professor Mirkin’s mistake, if that is what it was, was to break the last big taboo in American mores and suggest paedophilia should not be regarded as a monolithic phenomenon but rather as a social and political construct subject to the changing attitudes of different eras.

Raping a child, he argued, should not be put in the same category as sex between a consenting teenager and an adult; art works that refer to the sexuality of children should not be dismissed out of hand as pornography – just think of Donatello’s David.

His article, which appeared in the Journal of Homosexuality, went entirely unnoticed until a group called Concerned Women For America discovered it on the internet.

Source: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/death-threats-over-paedophilia-article-653107.html

Here is the entire article, by permission of the Independent

The following NewYorker article recognizes Professor Mirkin’s right to publish academic discourse, even when disturbing. But they know that Mirkin’s ideas are “silly”

The professor is Harris Mirkin, who teaches in the political-science department at the University of Missouri’s Kansas City campus. The article at issue is “The Pattern of Sexual Politics: Feminism, Homosexuality, and Pedophilia,” published in the Journal of Homosexuality, in 1999.[…]

Professor Mirkin published a silly article. It purports to show that the current situation of pedophiles is analogous to the situation of homosexuals before the gay-rights movement and of women before the women’s movement. Pedophilia, he argues, is regarded by almost everyone who is not a pedophile as unnatural, depraved, criminal; but many heterosexuals once thought that homosexuality was a disease and an offense against God and nature, and many men once thought that sexually active women were monsters. In each of the earlier cases, the dominant group maintained that there was a “natural” type of sexual behavior. And, in each case, once it was demonstrated that what people believe to be “natural” is just a “social construction,” devised by the dominant group to preserve its own status, then the “deviant” group was on its way to acceptance. Mirkin suggested that pedophiles might be at this stage. When people realize that in earlier times sex between men and boys was thought to be unexceptionable, they will see that the present taboo is a convention, and not based on anything real. “Like homosexuality,” Mirkin writes, “the concept of child molestation is a culture- and class-specific modern creation.” No doubt, as a student of contingency, he appreciates the irony that his views have become widely known not because pedophiles are gaining acceptance (as he seemed to predict) but because of the scandal in the Catholic Church.

http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2002/05/13/020513ta_talk_menand

A few examples of open-minded  Scientific Literature:

Sexuality & Culture

CUMULATIVE CONTENTS, VOL. 1–9

VOLUME 1 (1997)

THEMATIC ISSUE: SEXUAL HARASSMENT AND SEXUAL CONSENT

Editorials Sexuality & Culture: An Interdisciplinary Annual
Barry M. Dank

Sexual Harassment, Sexual Consent, and Beyond
Roberto Refinetti

Theoretical Articles Sexual Harassment in Organizations: A Critique of Current Research and Policy
Christine L. Williams

Sexual Harassment Policies as All-Purpose Tools to Settle Conflicts
Heinz-Joachim Klatt

“Academia’s Dirty Little Secret”: Deconstructing the Sexual Harassment Hysteria
Klaus de Albuquerque

Forbidden Love: Student-Professor Romances
Barry M. Dank and Joseph S. Fulda

On Prohibiting Relationships between Professors and Students
Peg Tittle

Empirical Articles Gender-Specific Differences in Evolved Mating “Strategies”: The Evolutionary Basis of Sexual Conflict
Peggy La Cerra

College Students’ Perceptions of the Relationship between Sex and Drinking
Gwendell W. Gravitt, Jr. and Mary M. Krueger

Source: http://www.springerlink.com/content/86q8a7k0x52gpj11/

Feminist writer Judith Levine’s book, Harmful to Minors: The Perils of Protecting Children from Sex (University of Minnesota Press, $25.95), has been condemned by those who say she excuses sexual abuse of children–a charge she strongly denies. Levine says she was misunderstood after a news article in March quoted her as saying that a boy’s sexual experience with a priest “conceivably” could be positive.

“Do I advocate priests having sex with their child parishioners? No, absolutely no,” she says. However, she adds, “The research shows us that in some minority of cases, young–even quite young–people can have a positive [sexual] experience with an adult.”

Featuring a foreword by Clinton administration surgeon-general Joycelyn Elders, Levine’s book endorses a Dutch law passed in 1990 that effectively lowers the age of consent to 12. “America’s drive to protect kids from sex is protecting them from nothing,” she writes. “Instead, often it is harming them.”

The book has sparked a political backlash against her publisher, the University of Minnesota Press. The speaker of the Minnesota House of Representatives condemned the book and called for the university to halt its publication. Instead, the university press recently ordered a second printing of 10,000 copies after media attention helped drive Levine’s book as high as No. 26 on the Amazon.com best-seller list.

Source: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1571/is_18_18/ai_86868910/#comments

Judith Levine expected her book on child sexuality to stir some controversy, but she never dreamed she would be called an evil accomplice to child molesters.

Though not yet released, Levine’s book, Harmful to Minors: The Perils of Protecting Children From Sex, has already attracted angry letters, phone calls and e-mails directed at her and her publisher, University of Minnesota Press.

The book argues that efforts to protect children from sex can do more harm than good, especially when parents and educators are afraid to recognize children as sexual beings.

Sex is a part of growing up for children and teenagers, Levine argues, and not all sexual encounters with adults are necessarily traumatic for minors. This has prompted critics to accuse Levine of endorsing child molestation and sexual abuse.

“My book is not about intergenerational sex,” Levine said. “I am not endorsing sex abuse of children. Quite the contrary. It was my hope that the book would allow parents and other adults to talk realistically about issues of kids and sexuality. Instead, there is an effort to suppress the book and stop that conversation.” […]

Levine endorses the Netherlands’ approach to age-of-consent laws. In 1990, the Dutch parliament made sex between adults and children ages 12 to 16 legal as long as there was mutual consent. The child or the child’s parents can bring charges if they believe the minor was coerced into sex.

Levine believes the Dutch law is a “good model” for the United States because it recognizes children as sexual beings who can determine their future while not ignoring the fact that they are weaker than adults and still need legal protection. U.S. consent laws, she says, mistakenly put all minors under one category without recognizing their ability to pursue relationships.

“Legally designating a class of people categorically unable to consent to sexual relations is not the best way to protect children, particularly when ‘children’ include everyone from birth to eighteen,” Levine writes. “Criminal law, which must draw unambiguous lines, is not the proper place to adjudicate family conflicts over youngsters’ sexuality. If such laws are to exist, however, they must do what [social psychologist Lynn M.] Phillips suggests about sexual and romantic education: balance the subjective experience and the rights of young people against the responsibility and prerogative of adults to look after their best interests, to ‘know better.’”

Source: http://pedophileophobia.com/hysteria.htm
See also http://www.ageofconsent.com/netherlands.htm

John Holt (1923 – 1985), an American teacher who authored Escape from Childhood – The Needs and Rights of Children, stated that “all people, including young people, should have the right to control their own private sex lives and acts”.[citation needed] He considers that “it is not the proper business of the state or government to pry into such matters”. Holt refutes the concept of child innocence and opposes laws on age of consent as unfair and morally wrong.

Judith Levine, an American journalist and author of Harmful to Minors: The Perils of Protecting Children from Sex, is against the legal regulation of children’s involvement in sexual activities. Levine suggests that, if such laws are to exist, an appropriate model would be the legal framework that existed in the Netherlands during the 1990s, now abolished, which required a complaint from a parent or other authority to pursue a prosecution where 12-15 year olds were involved.

British journalist Miranda Sawyer maintains that the age of consent should be lowered to 12 in the United Kingdom, arguing that the criminalization of all sexual activity for ages under 16 is “laughably unrealistic”.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_consent_reform

Is child molestation a sickness or a crime?

Thomas Szasz from the August/September 2002 issue

Medical Penal Establishment

Today virtually any unwanted behavior, from shopaholism and kleptomania to sexaholism and pedophilia, may be defined as a disease whose diagnosis and treatment belong in the province of the medical system. Disease-making thus has become similar to lawmaking. Politicians, responsive to tradition and popular opinion, can define any act, from teaching slaves to read to the cold-blooded murder of a bank guard, as a crime whose control belongs in the province of the criminal justice system.

Applied to behavior, especially sexual behavior, the disease label combines a description with a covert value judgment. Masturbation, homosexuality, and the use of nongenital body parts (especially the mouth and anus) for sexual gratification have, at one time or place, all been considered sins, crimes, diseases, normal behaviors, and even therapeutic measures. For many years psychiatrists imprisoned homosexuals and tried to “cure” them; now they self-righteously proclaim that homosexuality is normal and diagnose people who oppose that view as “homophobic.” Psychiatrists diagnose the person who eats too much as suffering from “bulimia” and the person who eats too little as suffering from “anorexia nervosa.” Similarly, the person who has too much sex suffers from “sex addiction,” while the person who shows too little interest in sex suffers from “sexual aversion disorder.” Yet psychiatrists do not consider celibacy a form of mental illness; celibate persons are not said to suffer from “anerotica nervosa.”

Why not? Because psychiatrists, politicians, and the media respect the Roman Catholic Church’s definition of celibacy as a virtue, a “gift from God,” even though celibacy is at least as “abnormal” as homosexuality, which the church continues to define as a grievous sin — an “intrinsic evil,” in the words of Cardinal Anthony Bevilacqua. Regardless of how unnatural or socially destructive a pattern of sexual behavior might be, if the church declares it to be virtuous — as with celibacy or abstinence from nonprocreative sexual acts — psychiatrists do not classify it as a disease. Thus a religion’s moral teachings shape what is ostensibly a scientific judgment.

Sources:

http://reason.com/archives/2002/08/01/sins-of-the-fathers http://www.staff.uwp.edu/academic/criminal.justice/chldabuse01bk.htm

Kinsey’s interest in boys

Reisman contends that Alfred Kinsey was the father not only of the revolution that spawned the current permissive sexual climate, but also of the movement gaining ground among some scholars to legitimize sex between adults and children.

In her book “Kinsey: Crimes & Consequences,” Reisman presents evidence that Kinsey was a pedophile. She points out that “anywhere from 317 boy infants and children to 2,035 total children” were subjected to sex experiments for the Kinsey data in Chapter 5 of the Male and Female volumes of his reports.”

In 1948, Kinsey published “Sexual Behavior in the Human Male” and in 1953 “Sexual Behavior in the Human Female.”

Reisman wrote that “the truly amazing fact is that at the time the activities required to perform the ‘research’ on children to obtain data on their ‘sexuality’ would have involved actions that were clearly criminal in all 50 states of the USA and that these criminal activities were being committed under the protection and with knowledge of the Indiana University. ”

Reisman noted that in an essay, Albert Jonson and J. Mann reported that Kinsey “included observational reports on the speed of reaching orgasm in 1,888 boys, aged 5 months to adolescence who were timed with a stopwatch” and “147 preadolescent” girls. Jonson and Mann cite their “personal communication” with Wardell Pomeroy, Kinsey’s co-author, who validated the 1,888 boys in the Kinsey Reports, Reisman wrote.

Reisman’s work on Kinsey gained attention in the UK in 1998 when Yorkshire television aired a documentary by Tim Tate called “Kinsey’s Paedophiles.” Tate said, based on extensive research, that the data was used by Kinsey to suggest that children can enjoy their abuse. The program has never been aired in the U.S.

Howard Ruppel, chancellor and academic dean of the graduate school that arose from the Kinsey Institute, the Institute for Advanced Study of Human Sexuality in San Francisco, told WorldNetDaily he has no comment regarding allegations that Kinsey was a pedophile

Source: http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=27104.

Dawkins just takes apart all the religous arguments, shreds them into pieces. Watch the video “the purpose of purpose”.

I have seen discussions, where poor scientist just could not lower themselves to argue on the same level of demagogic obfuscation as the religious dogmatists, and thus looked bad. See the following example of a scientist that was too shy to counterattack.

Evolutionary theory has yet unexplained gaps. Therefore we need to be open-minded and to offer out children alternative theories, like “intelligent design”.

Biological knowledge of embryonal development has unexplained gaps. Therefore we need to be open-minded and to offer out children alternative theories, like “stork theory of child delivery”.

The geology of the earth is still not fully explained. Therefore we need to be open-minded and to offer out children alternative theories, like “flat earth theory” and “hollow earth theory”.

Same about alchemy in chemistry classes, astrology in astronomy classes, and witchcraft in medical first aid courses.

If Dawkins is too fiery for you, follows a very cool scientific analysis of scientific creationism

The following video explains:
Theory is not “guesses or hunches”, as in lay people language. Theory to a scientist means explanation, logical constructs of tested hypotheses, facts, laws.

Links to other 23 videos in this series:

1.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bV4_lVT Va6k
2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7Ctl9…
3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVaCmA…
4: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6_Ktv…
5: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TNxXlq…
6: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9X50lH…
7: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JIzaeI…
8: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1BJa7W…
9: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3CCapu…
10: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mp7b9E…
11: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LzTlZo…
12: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjXYZd…
13: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ske9pw…
14: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxnJ8y…
15: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TkcC8F…
16: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7XDn5S…
17: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9KD3XY…
18: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ZLOqJ…
19: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PVz6se…
20: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2BVfP…
21: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q5PNzx…
22: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrlYz0…
23: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQbv6E…
24: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKhG24…

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/8022861.stm

‘Teen fantasy’

Professor Kevin Browne, who has been researching the maltreatment of children for 30 years, says between 5% and 10% of abuse against pre-pubescent children in the UK is committed by females, but only about 5% is thought to involve a woman acting alone.

[..]

Female offences against teenagers are more of a mystery, he says, because victims don’t come forward, partly because in a patriarchal society boys are even expected to enjoy that kind of abuse, and not admit how scared they are by it.

[...]

Like male paedophiles, many female offenders convince themselves they are not harming children, says psychologist Sharon Lambert who this month presented her research on the subject to the British Psychological Society’s annual conference.

[...]

Disclaimer: The issue here is not so much my personal opinion as to how laws should be. Rather the issue is that eminent scientist become “stupid” and irrational when facing issues where society has a strong preconceived dogmatic notion.  Instead of true academic research, they just reinforce the stereotypes.