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.

Why does the press not call this stupid insanity by name? Society was brainwashed so the teenage sex witch hunt continues unabated.

Marco Weiss had kissed a British girl Charlotte in Turkey.

A 17-year-old German student faces up to eight years in Turkish prison. His offense? Kissing and fondling a 13-year-old British girl who allegedly lied about her age.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,490525,00.html

A Turkish court has sentenced a German teenager to a suspended prison term of  two-and-a-half years for sexual abuse of a 13-year-old girl.

As usual, this is where the manipulative lies start. Consensual sexual activity is called “sexual abuse”. Just because it involves a minor. The law distorting facts, worse then any Nazi propaganda. A kiss is a kiss, abuse is abuse. A consensual kiss is not abuse or rape.

Weiss had been detained in a Turkish prison for eight months before being released on bail in December 2007. His attorney had lodged a formal complaint with the European Court of Justice about conditions at the prison, where the teenager was held in a cell with 30 other prisoners and only one toilet.

German prosecutors in Lueneburg closed their parallel inquiry in May after being unable to confirm the sexual assault charges
http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,4697909,00.html

It is not just Turkey. Even in Germany Teenagers need legal counsel before kissing one of their peers. They need to check ID, consult legal books to make sure they can kiss.

Am I the only one who sees this insanity as total stupid human rights violation of minors.

Weiss maintained that he and the girl became close while in the Mediterranean resort of Side, near Antalya, and one night ended up in the girl’s hotel bedroom where they had physical contact but no intercourse. He also said the girl had lied about her age and said she was 15.

He was arrested the next day, after the girl’s mother filed a complaint with Turkish police, and he was held for eight months in custody until being allowed to return home after an appeal from German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier.

On his return, Weiss wrote a book _ “Marco W. _ My 247 days in a Turkish prison” _ detailing his time inside the jail in Antalya.

Weiss’ lawyer also said he would appeal Wednesday’s conviction, arguing that his client should have been cleared.

“Marco Weiss should have been acquitted, that is what we requested and that is what we will push for,” Mehmet Asim Iplikcioglu said. “We will fight for that until the end.”

In a similar case in 2004, a 24-year-old Turkish bartender was sentenced to nearly five years in prison for the statutory rape of a 14-year-old British teenager who ran away from home to marry him. The two met in 2002 while she was vacationing in the Marmaris resort.
http://www.etaiwannews.com/etn/news_content.php?id=1059170&lang=eng_news&cate_img=1037.jpg&cate_rss=General

[Disclaimer: My main topic is "defense of free research", "freedom to find the scientific true facts" without getting death threats. This is not a crusade for underage sex, it is rather about unbiased truth & freedom of research versus dogmatic preconceived ideas]

http://www.radicalleft.net/blog/_archives/2006/6/5/1990675.html

In the only instance of a U.S. Congressional resolution against a scientific paper, the House of Representatives, with only minimal opposition, denounced a study by Dr. Bruce Rind & others, published in the scholarly review, Psychological Bulletin, in 1998.

This “meta-analysis” reviewed several research protocols about adult-child sexuality, and summarized them as showing that relationships in which force was not used did not appear to cause harm, and sometimes might be beneficial. Rind and his co-authors have been systematically ostracized and excluded from many scholarly journals.

In 2005, a book by a major publisher, which contained another scholarly article by Rind, was withdrawn by that publisher (Hayworth) because of protests from fundamentalist Christians.

Other gay writers like William Herdt and John DeCecco who researched sexual outlaw behavior in the U.S. (DeCecco) or intergenerational sexuality in non-western cultures (Herdt) simply moved on to other topics.

This did not keep DeCecco from experiencing extreme persecution—while a Professor in San Francisco he had to hire bodyguards to protect him from right-wing attackers.

A number of women researchers and radical feminists have attempted to undermine or slow down the sex panic.

Among them have been Camille Paglia, Debbie Nathan, Joan Nelson, Elizabeth Stoney, Laura Marks, Gayle Rubin, Pat Califia, Carole Vance, Marjorie Heins, Joanne Wypijewski, Janice Irvine and Judith Levine.

Paglia has been castigated by other sex researchers and many feminist writers for her defense of man-boy sexual relationships in particular.

Although she has published lengthy, well-researched summaries of the history of sexuality and sexual research, she is seldom included in university curriculums involving these topics.

Many of the other women writers suffered similar consequences or censorship of their views. Debbie Nathan, who exposed and virtually stopped the so-called satanic cult child sex panic with her book Satan’s Silence (Basic Books, 1996), has spoken of the icy reception her work has sometimes received.

She said, “… I have often had a sense of being intellectually and professionally marginalized, and I have experienced instances of editors killing pieces I’ve written about sexual hysteria because they got cold feet, as well as refusals to assign such stories.”

One woman writer, who had never had problems with previous articles on other subjects for a prestigious national magazine, attempted a balanced look at the crusade against Catholic priests, especially the sensational case of Father Paul Shanley. She was called in by the editor who said he simply could not run her piece.

Even before Judith Levine’s Harmful to Minors: The Perils of Protecting Children from Sex was published in 2002, a massive campaign by fundamentalist Christian groups, including Concerned Women for America, attacked the publisher, the University of Minnesota Press.

While the book was published, the Press created a new process for reviewing its books before publication.

Levine spoke publicly about how she was humiliated time and again in public. She said the manuscript for her book had been turned down by many publishers, treated as if it were “radioactive.”

Among other insights, Levine wrote that “obsession with pedophiles stems for the reluctance to confront incest and the rampant sexualization of children” in American culture.

“Adults project the eroticized desire outwards, creating a monster to hate, hunt down and destroy.” Of the outcry against her book she added, “What happened to me is a perfect example of the hysteria my book is about.”

Nowhere is censorship and shunning greater than against those who would describe or depict childhood or adolescent sexuality, or mere nudity.

The “victims” of the evil perpetrators must also be protected—and projected as the spotless mirror image of their violators—at all costs—their purity and innocence asserted (even in the face of post-Freudian revelations of the sexual lives and interests of children).

Anything portraying the physical beauty of children or erotic aspects of their lives must be banned. (See Bob Chatelle’s excellent summaries of the impact of the child porn crusade on freedom of expression: Kiddie Porn Panic, 1993; Limits of Free expression & the Problem of Child Porn, 1997.)

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.

In the US, the laws on sexual repression/oppression are getting worse. I say this because I am a convicted sex offender.

It happened 10 years ago when at the age of 19 I had consensual sex with a girl aged 14.

At the time she told me that she was 18 (thus legal). The blame all fell on me however.

I was told that I should have known better and sentenced to two years in prison.

At that age, by US law, I was unable to make the decision to consume alcohol responsibly, yet I should have known that she wasn’t 18?

How shocking is that?

Blind dogmatism makes exaggerated laws that stigmatize innocent people. The modern witch hunt. Adolescents need legal counsel before engaging in any sexual behavior.