Japan’s enjo kosai are the most famous teenagers who have sex with older men in order to buy stylish goods, but research reveals this relationship around the world. What seems to signal a loss of morals (for many commentators) is that the teenagers in question are not ‘poor’, since poverty is seen to ’excuse’ selling sex. See recent ideas about the desire to keep whore stigma away from women engaging in transactional sex. [..]

Katarzyna Roslaniec shot Mall Girls at a shopping center in central Poland, where four teenage girls turn tricks with men they call sponsors. ’Look at a guy’s shoes, his watch and his phone and you can tell if it’s expensive. It’s a start, right?’ Sex is exchanged for products like blouses, not for cash, and is provided in mall toilets or cars in the parking lot (Poland Looks Inward).

Mall Girls (Galerianki) 1/8 | YouTube

You can see all 8 parts of the film on YouTube. But seemingly no subtitles 2 3 4 5 6 7 8. If you google "filesonic galerianki.2009" you will find it in polish and you will need to get the galerianki (mall girl) subtitles. Drag and drop the subtitles into the vlc video player.

Storyline

Shopping malls – today’s place of creating desires. Best jewelry, clothes, shoes. Unaffordable by young girls, but they "work" to get themselves sponsors for new items.   International Movie Data Base //Trailer (polish, no subtitles)

Galerianki / Mall girls (Katarzyna Roslaniec) DVD R2 NON-USA FORMAT

Fourteen-year-old Alicja enters a new middle-school class. She is a wise and prudent girl who finds herself up against a group of arrogant classmates decked out in the latest fashions and accessories. In the beginning these girls make her life impossible, snubbing her and sneering at her. Alicja later finds out how they manage to have such luxuries and be so trendy: after school, in fact, they frequent malls where customers choose and buy the glittering objects in the showcases and where they can meet young men who “sponsor them”. Alicja thus begins to sell herself in exchange for a new mobile phone…MALL GIRLS (Galerianki)

Human-Stupidity analysis

• We hesitate a little to publish this. Information about underage prostitution will get feminists another goal to rally against.  These transactions seem legal in Poland.  Of course feminists will find ways to promote more government surveillance and heavy penalties to prohibit such consensual agreements. Consent, rape & minors. What is consent to sex? * Feminist arguments against prostitution debunked
• Underage adolescents who actively offer sex in exchange for luxury items. Not the downtrodden impoverished hungry girl forced to prostitute herself by hunger, nor by a greedy pimp. Impossible according to feminist theory.  Oh yes, it happens in Japan, too.
• The antifeminist mentions how feminists hate a free sex market
• The teens were not happy about their sex with ‘sponsors’.  But Alla screwed up sex with the inexperienced school boy crush just as well. Inexperience about how to have satisfying sexual relations is a problem. Lack of advice by experienced older sex positive  people.
• Those worried about Teenage morals and health could offer VOLUNTARY counseling for the teens. Treat citizens of all ages with respect instead of using police state methods of repression. Should police really substitute parental surveillance?
• Those who think this is immoral and not good adolescent behavior are probably right. But the solution in most countries is that government imprisons men for decades for something parental education  should take care of.
• Smart phones and designer clothes should not be so important for teenagers. Something should fill the void in these shallow teens. But we object to the modern feminist moralist solution to use legal police and court terror to prevent teenagers from finding sponsors to fulfill their fashion desires?
• Paid sex happening in shopping center toilets? Sex with the school crush in a stinking ruin? Full legality, privacy, non-shaming sex positive environment could provide better,safer, more hygienic conditions.
• Discussion about prostitution rarely deals with the frustration of men who can not get sex. Men who can not get the satisfaction and inner strength gained from easily accessible sex. Even nerds and losers feel the pain of, well, being despised losers. In our modern discussion nobody cares about frustration of men and boys.
• Yes, there is another movie "Piggies" about adolescent boys that have sex for money. But the moral panic is always about girls, not about men.

Read more:

• Polish Teenagers turn to Prostitution | Polish Forum
• Adolescent prostitution in Poland. Trade Sex for Smart Phone.| Der Spiegel
• Feminist arguments against prostitution debunked | Human Stupidity
• "Belle de Jour": Cancer Scientist financed Doctorate with Prostitution| Human Stupidity 

Consider that child pornography was actually LEGAL at one time. Later, it became illegal to PRODUCE. And then it became illegal to DISTRIBUTE. And then it became illegal to SHOW to someone else. And then it became illegal to POSSESS if produced AFTER a certain date. And then all possession became illegal. And then the penalties became stiffer. Then stiffer, still. And stiffer again and again.

How true

Consider also that child pornography now includes DRAWINGS and CARTOONS which at no time involved the use of actual children, something that would have been unthinkable just a few years ago.

How true. Even voodoo theory can not justify this. Robert Kurzban can explain how even then victims can be found.

And these laws can DESTROY the rest of your LIFE, even if there are no victims.

This is the essence of incremental social engineering (Quoted from Sex Gulag)

1) Fake Simpsons cartoon is ‘child porn’

A fake cartoon depicting Bart and Lisa from The Simpsons engaging in sexual acts has been deemed as child pornography.

Supreme Court judge Justice Michael Adams ruled in Australia that child cartoon characters could depict a real person.

The Simpsons were doctored to depict child pornography

He upheld a magistrate judge’s decision to convict Alan John McEwan of possessing child pornography after the internet cartoons were found on his computer.

The animation depicted characters modelled on Bart, Lisa and Maggie Simpson engaging in sex acts. [...]

McEwan appealed against the ruling, arguing that fictional cartoon characters could not be considered people.

Justice Adams said: "If the persons were real, such depictions could never be permitted. Their creation would constitute crimes at the very highest end of the criminal calendar."

He also ruled that, while the characters from The Simpsons had hands with four fingers and their faces were "markedly and deliberately different to those of any possible human being", the fact they were not realistic representations of human beings did not mean that they could not be considered people.

He said the law was in place to deter the production of cartoons that could "fuel demand for material that does involve the abuse of children".

Of course, prohibition of child porn fuels the demand for real children, as Dr. Milton Diamond‘s papers prove. Those who can act out their urges masturbating with pictures of children have less urge to abuse real children.  Additionally,  much of child porn is neither porn nor has (prepubescent) children, rather is adolescent erotica (Knox vs. USA, Copine scale).

2) Police see rise in child porn cases committed by children

Of course, children are live child pornography themselves. And they need to be protected from themselves. Putting them in a court of law to save them from victimizing themselves. Sorry, we have difficulty understanding this nonsense witch hunt beliefs.

NASHVILLE, Tenn. – Police are issuing a warning for Mid-State youth disturbing pornographic images of themselves and their friends via the Internet.

Although sent by minors, the cases are considered child porn and violators will be prosecutors.

Currently in Metro, Sex Crimes Detective Mike Adkins says he has five cases of child-initiated child porn on his desk and the number of cases continues to climb.

According to Adkins, either the juveniles don’t understand the risks involved or they don’t care.

Well, it difficult. Children see naked women everywhere. On Playboy magazine covers. Now if they photograph themselves in the mirror, in the same pose, they commit a heinous crime. They are unaware of voodoo theory that posits that they are victimizing themselves while photographing, and that they get victimized again when their friend looks at their photo.

It is hard to explain illogical things to children. It is difficult enough to explain them logical things, to get them to eat broccoli and abstain from burgers and fries. But making them understand that taking their own pictures is the worst of crimes? Much worse then theft or robbery?

One might explain to a child not to post nude photos on Facebook. But how to explain that what they see when they look in the bathroom mirror is live child porn which can not be photographed even to keep on one’s own camera? Should they close their eyes when changing clothes in front of a mirror?

"The children are committing several crimes manufacturing of child porn, distribution of child porn and if it is still on their phones or computers, the possession of child porn," he explained, adding, "To the kids, understand this is a crime and the Internet is a real place with real rules that you have to follow and if you don’t follow them you could wind up in jail."

"I can’t think of any reason for a kid to have a Web cam in their own room," Adkins said.  "If they do, I can guarantee they are doing things that you might not want them to do."

A good way to acquaint children with the concept of a police state. Senseless silly laws that carry extreme penalties, even for children

While district attorneys have been reluctant to prosecute child-initiated child porn cases, Adkins predicts that will soon change.

Things are getting worse before they get better. Maybe this is the straw that breaks the camel’s back and decent middle class parents will rebel against these laws.

3) Rethinking Sex Offender Laws for Youth Texting |NYT

In Iowa, Jorge Canal is on the sex offenders registry because, at age 18, he was convicted of distributing obscene materials to a minor after he sent a picture of his penis by cellphone to a 14-year-old female friend who had requested it.

In Florida, Phillip Alpert, then 18, was charged with distributing child pornography and put on the sex offenders registry because after a fight, he sent a photograph of his nude 16-year-old girlfriend by e-mail to dozens of people, including her parents.

In most states, teenagers who send or receive sexually explicit photographs by cellphone or computer — known as “sexting” — have risked felony child pornography charges and being listed on a sex offender registry for decades to come.

But there is growing consensus among lawyers and legislators that the child pornography laws are too blunt an instrument to deal with an adolescent cyberculture in which all kinds of sexual pictures circulate on sites like MySpace and Facebook.

Criminalizing children for photographing themselves is a cruel consequence of child pornography laws. Of course, Human-Stupidity thinks that this is only the most extreme example and that child porn laws are cruel in general, damaging adults and children, while doing almost no good at all and actually helping to increase sexual child abuse (Milton Diamond). Child abuse laws should suffice. Why don’t we have laws against possession of murder, mutilation, lynching, adolescent jackass wannabe, and child shaking nanny movies.

The district attorney told parents of the students involved — both those in the images and those whose phones contained the images — that their children could be prosecuted for child pornography unless they took part in an after-school program.

The program, divided by gender, involved random drug tests, probation and classes in which the girls would “gain an understanding of what it means to be a girl in today’s society,” by, among other things, writing essays on why their actions were wrong.

Only three of more than a dozen families refused to join the program — those of two girls, ages 12 and 13, who were pictured wearing bras at a slumber party, and of a third girl who was shown emerging from the shower with a towel wrapped under her breasts. The parents say the photographs were not pornographic, a question no court has yet considered.

Pictures do not have to be pornographic to be child pornography. (Copine scale, Knox vs. USA).

And there has been no evidence that any of the three girls played a part in circulating the photographs.

The parents went to court, claiming that prosecution would amount to retaliation for refusal to join the program.

It must be traumatizing to participate in such classes. Children get traumatized by cruel repressive sex and child pornography laws. Rarely children get traumatized by child pornography in spite of voodoo theories.

4) Pornography sentence unconstitutionally cruel, judge rules

Between the ages of 15 and 19, he downloaded pornography, much of it involving boys ages 10-12, and shared files with other users.
When he was 19 years old, the FBI ensnared him in a sting and the world came crashing down. Under federal law, “C.R.” faced a statutory minimum of five years in prison.
Until Judge Jack B. Weinstein intervened, ruling that the 5-year minimum is unconstitutional in C.R.’s case, due to the youth’s age and immaturity.
The ruling is part of a crusade by Weinstein, one of the United States’ most accomplished and respected jurists, against what he calls “the unnecessary cruelty of the law.” Previously, the 89-year-old federal judge in the Eastern District of New York led a similar campaign against rigid drug sentencing. 

Read Human-Stupiditý.com’s 50 posts on child porn.

Hebephile, a newly proposed diagnostic classification in which people display a sexual preference for children at the cusp of puberty, between the ages of, roughly, 11 to 14 years of age. Pedophiles, in contrast, show a sexual preference for clearly prepubescent children. There are also ephebophiles (from ephebos, meaning “one arrived at puberty” in Greek), who are mostly attracted to 15- to 16-year-olds; teleiophiles (from teleios, meaning, “full grown” in Greek), who prefer those 17 years of age or older); and even the very rare gerontophile (from gerontos, meaning “old man” in Greek), someone whose sexual preference is for the elderly. So although child sex offenders are often lumped into the single classification of pedophilia, biologically speaking it’s a rather complicated affair. Some have even proposed an additional subcategory of pedophilia, “infantophilia,” to distinguish those individuals most intensely attracted to children below six years of age.
Based on this classification scheme of erotic age orientations, even the world’s best-known fictitious “pedophile,” Humbert Humbert from Nabokov’s masterpiece, Lolita, would more properly be considered a hebephile. (Likewise the protagonist from Thomas Mann’s Death in Venice, a work that I’ve always viewed as something of the “gay Lolita”).  
Why most "pedophiles" aren’t really pedophiles, technically speaking | Scientific American

The meaning of the word "Pedophile" was manipulatively changed and distorted. Pedophile is a clearly defined scientific term meaning an adult that has attraction to pre-pubertal children.

We are discussing grammar, semantics, and politics of language manipulation here.
We are not defending or condoning pedophile activities.

Correct Terminology

Hebephiles, Ephebophiles, Teleiophile were grouped into the "pedophile" group. So a "worse label’ can be attached to a sexual offender. An "adolescent lover" who had a 17 year old girlfriend is called "child lover" (or rather, in a second step of vilification, child rapist). Sure helps to secure longer jail terms and to get the population angry.  This is exactly identical to the manipulation that extended the word "child" from under 12 or under 14, to under 18, admittedly for the purpose of enforcing child protection laws for adolescents.

Additionally, child mutilators and murderers are usually called "pedophiles" in the press. Killing children has nothing to do with "child lovers" or sexual attraction for children.

Brooke Shields re-victimized constantly?

Thus someone gets arrested for possession of Brooke Shields 15 year photos , falsely called a pedophile, and the average Joe thinks he is a baby murderer. Note that the bikini photo of a 15 year-old  becomes child pornography in case one collects the photo for sexual arousal (Copine level 4).

According to child porn persecution theory, "children" (under 18) get re-victimized whenever someone looks at their depictions.. We prevented the re-victimization of Brooke Shields through the first 10 year old photo by putting black bars at all private parts.  Add to this the famous Brooke Shields movies (Blue Lagoon, …) , one can see that Brooke Shields constantly gets re-victimized thousands of times per day by people who watch these movies with an impure mind.

Infantophiles

Of course, Infant abusers can be labelled with a stronger label then "pedophile". Those attracted to 17 year olds are more ostracised by the incorrect application of the name "pedophile" or child lover, then by "teleiophile", late adolescent lover. To reach the maximum vilification, the word "infantophile" is now, correctly, created. It is undesirable that perverts that mess with infants can hide behind the word "pedophile", which could mean attraction to 9 year olds.

We are discussing grammar, semantics, and politics of language manipulation here. We are not defending or condoning pedophile activities.

There are also law abiding pedophiles who declaredly do not act upon their attraction. These, in spite of being accused merely of thought crimes, are in danger of being hurt by angy pedophile vigilantes.

Other Language manipulation ("rape", "consent")

Human-Stupidity has assailed the manipulative distortion of language is very common in the service of criminalizing adolescent sexuality.  The meaning of "rape" and "consent" have been manipulatively changed, just like "pedophile" and "child".

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)

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

The correct legal situation info about German law

brooklynNYC

1:14:58 PM
Dec 14, 2010

The age of consent in Germany is 14, as long as a person over the age of 21 does not exploit a 14–15 year-old person’s lack of capacity for sexual self-determination. In this rare and special case, a conviction on an individual over the age of 21 requires a complaint from the younger individual; being over 21 and engaging in sexual relations with a minor of that age does not constitute an offense in and of itself. Otherwise the age of consent is 14 As specified by Sections 176 (Sexual abuse of children) and 182 (Sexual abuse of youths), which read: § 176: “(1) Whoever commits sexual acts on a person under fourteen (14) years of age (a child) or allows them to be committed on himself by the child, shall be punished by imprisonment from six months to ten years [...]” § 180: “(1) Whoever abets the commission of sexual acts of a person under sixteen years of age on or in front of a third person or sexual acts of a third person on a person under sixteen years of age: 1. by actin

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/2010/12/13/2010-12-13_dad_47_in_germany_castrates_man_57_for_dating_his_17yearold_daughter_cops.html#ixzz18gPfl3nc

Positive and understanding opinions

anabelle23

4:23:30 PM
Dec 14, 2010

the little strumpet knew EXACTLY what she was doing. this entire puritanical hypocrisy is the stuff puke is made from. the older man probably treated her better than most young men who pretend to love, deflower, and dump leaving them emotionally scarred and damaged. the father was wrong, wrong, wrong – hope they castrate him then throw him into a gay prison for 20 years. there is a reason why girls can make babies at 13 so stop pretending they are innocent little angels. some of them are more savvy and cunning than professional streetwalkers.

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/2010/12/13/2010-12-13_dad_47_in_germany_castrates_man_57_for_dating_his_17yearold_daughter_cops.html#ixzz18gRii1bv

Chad66

1:47 PM
Dec 13, 2010

The girl likes older men. So who cares. Or was Daddy jealous because she was dating this other guy and not her own Daddy. Beisdes, like someone mentioned, nothing was said about having sex. AND why did Daddy need other people to help him. And if she likes older ment , there will always be older men around. Daddy should get 40 years in jail. at lest.

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/forums/thread.jspa?threadID=118502&start=40&tstart=0#ixzz18gg3eB4A

lebinz

1:51 PM
Dec 13, 2010

You’re all talking about two different things. 1. whether or not this is a child molestation case (i tend to think that this is an insult to REAL cases where 9 and 12 year are being raped), and 2. whether older men should date younger women. The first is clear, the children should be protected, the second is not only stupid, but insulting to women. Just like we shouldn’t be telling women what to do with their own bodies; just like it is wrong for muslim women to be stoned for cheating; we should respect their decision. Whether you feel comfortable or not isn’ the issue, that is your opinion and it is none of your business.

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/forums/thread.jspa?threadID=118502&start=40&tstart=0#ixzz18ggW8rfW

lebinz

1:55 PM
Dec 13, 2010

And it is funny how, as a manager, I can’t tell a 20yr old “I don’t hire women so young” but we as total strangers can say who they get to date and who they don’t get to date. Even by imposing restrictions on the “age limit” they are allowed to date is simply treating them like a piece of property. No one says this about boys. Boys do whatever they want with whomever they want. Demmi Moore picks up someone younger than she is and she gets a pat on the back. Donald Trump dates a model and people are angry. Women are property. Simple as that. This is why some of you are so outrage at the simple fact that there is an age difference.

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/forums/thread.jspa?threadID=118502&start=40&tstart=0#ixzz18gghjRrQ

plsstoptheHate101

1:49 PM
Dec 13, 2010

Josie911 I take personal offense to your statement because I am one of those that has benefited from Viagra, and I am putting my 19yr old girlfriend to college. So what do we have in common, she is getting a free education and I keep a smile on my face, what is wrong with that.

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/forums/thread.jspa?threadID=118502&start=40&tstart=0#ixzz18gjL5S3A

plsstoptheHate101

2:17 PM
Dec 13, 2010

I was going Yeah good for him until I realise that I am 55 and dating a 19yr old…thanks to Viagra she is very happy. I tell you what, there is not a young man today if he lives to be an old man who will not appreciate Viagra. Pryor to Viagra men committed suicide.

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/forums/thread.jspa?threadID=118502&start=40&tstart=0#ixzz18ghbZvjc

OBJ

3:19 PM
Dec 13, 2010

Zeke: And Hindus and French Catholics and Canadian. In much of the world young women marry older men for stability and security. Their philosophy is why marry a guy and be with him during the struggling years when you can marry someone who is already established. And end up a well-off widow.

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/forums/thread.jspa?threadID=118502&start=80&tstart=0#ixzz18goI9woN

Violent reactions

RickEvans033050

7:57:08 AM
Dec 20, 2010

The number of sociopath posters applauding this guy’s actions is appalling. Yes the age difference is disturbing however a 17 year old is not a little girl. Also, using ‘man’ to describe him is a stretch considering the coward had to recruit a couple of thug pals to restrain the victim. It’s one thing for this 47 year old to man-up and go one-on-one against the 57 year old victim over his daughters’ “honor”. This was a cowardly lynching

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/2010/12/13/2010-12-13_dad_47_in_germany_castrates_man_57_for_dating_his_17yearold_daughter_cops.html#ixzz18gSm8S1y

giantnyc

12:21 PM
Dec 13, 2010

While involvement with a teenager is despicable, I generally do not agree that people should be left to impose their brand of justice. Disguisting, yes, but was the low-life committing an illegal act? Was she at the age of legal consent? What if the father decides other things are his duty; restrictions based on religion, race, political leanings, anyone older than any age he decides is too old? Where is the limit? That is tough to say, but there is the law. He should probably have put on his thinking cap on and addressed why his young daughter is getting involved with an old man in the first place. Instead, he will be in jail, unable to help his daughter deal with her issues. Maybe this was more about him than his daughter. I dunno.

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/forums/thread.jspa?threadID=118502#ixzz18gdTvsUd

• Movie of 15 year old girl repeatedly brutally stomped on head: prime time news. Depicting the same girl posing nude would be child porn, a heinous crime.

“If you are using a picture of a naked child to bring people to your exhibition, then you are exploiting that child,” Michele Elliott of the child advocacy group Kidscape tells the Daily Telegraph.

How does that child get exploited? If she were not famous, she would not even know about the art gallery. In this case, she probably even got paid. And why that be exploitation? And what is the problem of being thus exploited? Will she lose money, health, time?

Oh, dignity? Well check the dignity of the kid that is being clubbed to death, on prime time TV:

• Nude adolescent photos: a Crime. Videos of lynching, killing, beating adolescents are legal Prime Time TV.

Feminists repeat the same stupid drivel (“picture of naked child is exploitation of the child“) over and over, until people actually believe their nonsense. This never ceases to impress me. Feminist stupid talk has magical qualities. No matter how stupid, no matter how unfounded and baseless, it becomes public policy and profoundly convinces press, police, law makers, the United Nations assembly, and supreme court judges.

• Supreme Court oks indefinite detention for possession of photos. But violent robbers get freed

The same exploitative photo was in Playboy in the 1970ies or 1980ies. We can see the horrendous damage that has been caused to Brook Shields and to millions of readers of that Playboy edition. She must still be a wreck today at 42 years of age.

I guess all people over 40 who have seen these and similar photos, are probably totally screwed up. They did not see only this one photo, but photos of nude 12-16 year olds were routinely in newspapers (page 3) and in youth magazines like Bravo or on the cover of prestigious German news magazine “Der Spiegel”. (23. May 1977)

Be careful, if you collect such magazines, you might get a 15 year jail sentence for possession if child pornography! Be afraid, be very afraid.
Brooke Shields 10 years old nude photo. Censored.
The above photo was removed from the art gallery in London.

You pedophiles want to see the uncensored photos?

• Brooke Shield 10y nude Photo Uncensored(Google Images)
  • Brooke Shields 10 years old nude (20 nude photos)
  • Tate Modern removes nude Brooke Shields after police visit.
• Google images search for more “Brooke Shields nude”

If you like this photo to the right, you are a “hebephile”, you like adolescent girls. Nowadays this is, on purpose, confused with pedophiles (pedophiles like pre-pubescent girls)

• Below: Cover of most prestigious new magazine of Germany. May 1977. Nude.  Today this constitutes child porn.

An entire nation of pedophiles: Millions - adults, children, babies - saw these photos (uncensored in complete nudity) in public news stands all over Germany in 1977. Imagine the terrible damage to the entire German population and to the girl. Any scientific literature available that discusses the damage from this heinous crime of exposing the poor victim? Of course not!!!

Clearly visible genitals, urination of an infant child. A heinous crime: the statue needs to be destroyed. Everyone responsible for this monstrosity needs 25 years of jail. Until recently, the world was unaware of the damage caused by such despicable criminal art.

A very nice discussion with examples of child pornographic art from major art museums, worth millions of dollars follows

• rationalskepticism.org/the-arts/pedophilia-or-art-t2459.html

“It’s as if they are using a 10-year-old girl for bait. I find it disturbing and they should be ashamed of themselves.” nj.com

They are not using a girl as bait. There is no girl there. The kid has grown and is 42 years old now! They are not exposing a girl, they are  exposing a 30 year old photo.

There are so many things I find much more disturbing. For example,

• Border arrest & instant jail for owning DVD with young looking 19 year old porn star. Any honest citizen risks jail
• Dangerous pedophile hunters threaten harmless pedophile
• Years of Jail for “clicking on child porn link”. But lynching videos are legal.

And there is real, proven danger to our children, that destroys the health of our children by the millions, causing premature death.

• “Child Food-Porn” (Junk food advertising) makes our children obese & unhealthy

If they use 10 year olds to feed their junk food to, to increase their corporate profit, then they are exploiting that child. I find that disturbing and they should be ashamed of themselves.

The Australian Childhood Foundation said parents had no ethical right to consent to nude photographs being taken of their children, as it could have a psychological impact in later years independent.co.uk

What psychological impact will a nude photo have in later years? More stupid drivel Not a shred of proof!

On the other hand, obesity will have psychological and physiological impact in later years. And parents have no ethical right to consent to fattening a child on junk food and sedentary life style.

Artist defends children’s right to pose nude

Henson dismissed the criticism that his young subjects were unable to consent to modelling nude.

He also claimed that posing for his photographs was less harmful than engaging in contact sports [ ... ]

In his Melbourne speech, he disputed the idea that his child models had been exploited. “Kids do consent to all kinds of significant things all the time. A 10-year-old can consent to something that might otherwise be unlawful assault: dental work. In this state, a 15-year-old can consent to a sex change. Children’s consent plays a major part in divorce proceedings.”

Henson – whose photographs are in Australia’s major public collections, as well as New York’s Guggenheim Museum – said there was no evidence that life modelling caused physical or psychological harm to children. By contrast, he said, a 12-year-old boy playing football could “find himself in a wheelchair” for the rest of his life.
nzherald.co.nz/entertainment/news/article.cfm?c_id=1501119&objectid=10663618

So true!  More here human-stupidity.com/irrationality/stupid-dogma/child-porn-witch-hunt

The most recent tension came from Pakistan’s decision that it will monitor Google, Bing, Yahoo (and other sites) for blasphemous content. Now it is the EU’s turn to try to impose checks on search engines through its controversial "Written Declaration 29."

Written Declaration 29
Italy’s European Member of Parliament, Tiziano Motti, is the author of the proposal, commonly known as Written Declaration 29, adopted last week. His aim was to protect children from abusers and paedophiles lurking on the web by requesting that user data from search engines be stored and used by governments to track sexual offenders.

Source: http://blog.searchenginewatch.com/100629-053942

Don’t we have enough REAL problems?

• A large percentage of children grow up in poverty stricken families, unintegrated into middle class society, condemned to low level of schooling and an unsuccessful life. 
• Hundreds of millions of our children will live an unhealthy life and die early, due to obesity, wrong nutrition, lack of exercise.
• Hundreds of millions of children also will be victims of bullying at school, threatened, intimidates, psychologically damaged.

And now, search machines are supposed to become government spies? In violation of civil rights of hundreds of million law abiding internet users. With the intent to catch a few dozen dangerous "pedophiles" and entrap a couple of thousand harmless surfers who have bad taste and seek photos of young kids?

Watchdog Privacy International immediately stepped up to the plate by issuing a joint statement with search engine Ixquick, entitled: Ixquick: Search Engines Should Become Government Spies, Says EU Parliament. Ixquick has built its reputation on not storing any user search data and therefore feels it has been singled out by the Declaration. For Robert Beens, CEO of Ixquick, Written Declaration 29 would jeopardize the privacy of over 500 million people across Europe when it should really uniquely concern known offenders. "Sex offenders exchange files through underground networks. They don’t find this stuff through search engines," Alex Hanff of Privacy International said in the statement. "I spent eight years helping law enforcement track down online sex offenders and never once did we see a case where search engine data was useful."

Source: http://blog.searchenginewatch.com/100629-053942

Human-Stupidity wrote more about these issues are in these topics: Child porn wich hunt and Teenage Sexuality witch hunt

Related articles about European Union Data Retention Plans

1. EU Politicians Tricked Into Supporting Data Retention On Search Terms… ‘For The Children’ (techdirt.com)
2. European MPs back web-search data retention plan (newstatesman.com)
3. MEPs back web search history plan (independent.co.uk)
4. Ixquick: Search Engines Should Become Government Spies, Says EU Parliament (eon.businesswire.com)
5. Italian MEP Wants To Eliminate Anonymity On the Internet (search.slashdot.org)
6. EU Request To Retain User Data From Search Engines Sparks Widespread Anger (searchenginewatch.com)
7. EU Parliament plans Google-powered paedo detector (go.theregister.com)
8. MEPs call for search engines to store web search histories for two years (telegraph.co.uk)
9. EU Ministers Want ISP and Google Logs To Fight Paedos (dvorak.org)

Ancient Greek Pedophile art: An ephebe kisses a man. 5th c.. At the Louvre. Proof of age not available.

Isn’t it strange? For traditional feminists who want female equality, freedom and self determination, it looks amazing

• feminists don’t oppose the burka and are quiet about Muslim repression of females (because Muslims successfully keep women away from the eyes of the feminist’s spouses)
• feminists successfully restrict women’s right to choose sexual services (prostitution) as a profession. that often pays lots more money then other work. Of course, men who can pay $100 to an attractive prostitute are less likely to marry an average looking fat aging woman who later will take away half their property and demand half their income.
• I got convinced that the antifeminists hypothesis is the most parsimonious explanation for these apparent contradictions.

Feminists conspire to increase their sexual value by eliminating female sexual of competition

Pedophile witch hunters & feminists are NOT concerned about children’s well being

If draconian child porn laws were to protect children, why then videos of real child killings are legal?
Nude adolescent photos: a Crime. Videos of lynching, killing, beating adolescents are legal Prime Time TV.

Congratulations to the antifeminist blog, they are the only ones that give a sensible explanation for this: feminists want to cut of competition to their sexual monopoly so men will continue paying high prices for sex (marriage with life long support and half of all property on divorce).

I quote the antifeminist blog, I could not say this any better.

Why do I think you are obsessed with criminilizing everything and only those things that harm your particular, selfish reproductive and sexual needs? Because that is all you seem to be interested in. What about teenage girls bullying and beating each other up on video and then having them uploaded to websites that make money from advertisements? Naahh, no sexual threat, therefore nothing to say. What about teenage girls and even 10 year old girls appearing on reality tv shows to be exploited for commercial gain by adults and clearly suffering psychological distress as a result? Nope, no specific sexual threat to your reproductive interests so you have probably never given it two seconds thought. A 17 year old who likes to screw older men? You don’t want your man running off with or even looking at a hot 17 year old, so therefore 17 year old girls can’t give meaingful consent and older men should be criminilized.[...]

Can 17 year old girls make meaningful decisions about whether or not their unborn babies should be killed? Is having sex really more complex than deciding which political party is best able to govern? Surely if an 18 year old can vote, a 17 year old can fuck? And how come she can consent to sex with another 17 year old and not a 25 year old??
http://www.theantifeminist.com/the-chilling-banality-of-evil/comment-page-1/#comment-2452

12 year old street children sleep on sidewalk while police hunts sex tourists who befriend 17 year old girls

I myself and many friends have, in a fairly rich third world country, witnessed 12 year old girls roaming and begging in the streets and sleeping on the sidewalk. Pretty soon they will be pregnant, impregnated by a street kid, and give birth to a street baby. All this in a very rich city neighborhood, and very visible to police and law enforcement.

Disclaimer: posting as “Devil’s advocate” I post suggestions that outrageously fly in the face of conventional opinion! Prepare to get shocked!

Would these girls not be better off if taken care of by a loving mature responsible pedophile like Jack McClellan, who would clothe them, send them to school, and give them birth control?
Instead of tetting education from street criminals, being at the mercy of street kid gangs (also sexually), lacking health services

Yes, I know, readers will be furious and quote this out of context to discredit this entire blog.

Yes, I know there are other possible solutions. But where are they? Where is Interpol,hunting down this girl so she could be sent to a decent school and quality foster parents? Interpol hunting the truant girl with the same might they would hunt down people for owning one single nude photo of the same girl! Where are the United Nations boycotting that country for neglecting to take care of kids. Where are feminists complaining about the orphan and child care facilities that are so bad that kids prefer the streets? They are too busy worrying about preventing distribution of 30 year old photographs.

At the same time, government and police are engaged in a hunt for tourists (and the occasional local) who have relationships with 17 year olds.

Distortion of terminology in the service of manipulation

It is quite amazing how language gets distorted, in order to dupe people to think this witch hunt is justified. Adolescent nude erotic photos become “child pornography”. In Europe, they defined now photos of very young looking 23 year olds with pony tails as “child pornography”

How to change these laws and witch hunts?

Ancient Greek Art: Child Porn depicting criminal Child Abuse (by today's standards)

Turn back the laws by 60 years

It is interesting, surprising even to myself. If asked how laws should be changed, my answer is:

• just go back to the sexual laws30-50 -120 years ago

Men were intelligent enough to sanction REAL abuse of REAL children. All other stuff was invented later. (read up on my web site, I just wrote a lot about the child porn witch hunt issue (child-porn-witch-hunt and Teenage Sexuality witch hunt )

Expose excesses & manipulative deception of the masses & academia

Honest language would be required. Language get raped (excuse the metaphor) to deceive the masses. Not only the masses! Academia (women’s studies, sociology), law, United Nations all buy into this manipulation. Everyone! Amazing!

Using words that for thousands of years had a clear meaning (rape) to mean something totally different (consensual sex, or mere fondling, of minors). This purposeful deception does not lend itself to truth-finding.

Maybe people get tired of ridiculous excesses like

• prosecution for taking naked photos of own kids in the bath,
• Girl 13, charged as sex offender and victim at the same time
• Sexting: Teens face child porn charges for exchanging their own nude photos
• To Catch a Predator” witch hunt by NBC Dateline & “Perverted Justice”
• 25 hottest sex offenders any boy wishes to become a victim of
• Teenage boy jailed and sentenced for consensually kissing teenage girl (Marco Weiss-Charlotte-Turkey)
• Italian arrested in Fortaleza (Brazil) for kissing (2 pecks) his 8 year old daughter
• Man who sought prostitute for son (14y) sentenced

Promote real research

Repression and prohibition of of academic research also helps perpetuating the witch hunt. (“Child Abuse” Dogmatists Repress Scientific Research). Like the persecution of Galileo Galilei. If the truth is suppressed to serve special interests (the Bible, or the feminist agenda), witch hunts get promoted.

Females winning evolutionary Male Femal Power Games

I am starting to get inspired to analyze, from an evolutionary point of view, how we got to where we are now. It seems to me:  men and women always had conflicts of interest. In the EEA (50 000 years ago in the savanna):

• Men had physical power, economical power (meat from killed prey, territory, …).
• Women had social and group manipulation skills and cunningness as their only counter-weapon to counter overpowering male physical power. Women even manage to enlist men to promote their issues …….

For stone age women, the only power they had to keep brute men at check would be

• acting as a cohesive group of solidary females
• shaming men for sexual digressions
• shaming men preventively BEFORE they could do sexual digressions

Men developed no defense against this because

• men still had the brute strength argument
• men still had the power to withhold food and protection
• women were usually right. They did not do excesses like punishing men with 20 years in jail for making cave drawings or stick figures of minors

Now men gave up both economic power and brute strength. Women kept all their power of cunningness. So women are winning on all fronts.

Comments? I am very interested in further research about the above hypotheses.  How can this be proven?

Well, I have shown, on this blog, that the underage sex, child porn, prostitution discussion is rife with deceitful language. That people make a big difference between issues of violent crimes (low penalties), depictions of violence (absolutely no penalty for crime and gore movies), and sexual thoughts and depictions (insane penalties).

Males gave away their power, females kept and increased their power

To be very provocative, a Devil’s Advocate, maybe men erred by giving women voting rights and all kind of other special rights and protections. They took these rights and used their superior social group skills to overpower men. Probably can not be undone. So how can men earn back their rights? No sane politician will legalize prostitution, decrease the age of consent, undo child porn laws. Unless, yes, maybe men band together like feminists ….

Or just give up and pay half of your income for your divorced ex-wive’s support and pay your child support without having the right to interfere and no right decide for which school your hard earned money is being spent. Too busy earning money to support your ex, no time for thinking and writing replies to blogs.

And too scared to go out, you might be leering at a 17 year old and arrested for your indecent thoughts.

Expose feminism, as in the antifeminist blog

I repeat again the very compelling theory, that

feminism is a trade Union to foster the self interest of middle aged unattractive women.

Middle aged unattractive feminists conspire to eliminate female sexual of competition

• increase age of consent to eliminate competition by very young attractive women (age of consent used to be 12, is now 18 everywhere and there seem to be plans to increase it to 21 worldwide).
• prohibit prostitution, to eliminate cheap easy sex
• try to eliminate pornography, which gives men sexual relief without needing live women
• try to eliminate sex dolls (while not restricting vibrators)

By eliminating other sexual outlets, men have no other sexual outlet and are thus forced to stay with unattractive women and pay dearly for it: it might cost them half their income and half their property. This is why this brand of feminists do not oppose the burka (eliminates competitors), do not favor self determination in prostitutes (picket violators, giving merchandise away cheaply)

Promote real equal rights feminism

There are a small number of different feminists who actually are concerned with equal rights and female freedom. But these are outnumbered and pretty quiet.

Consider Gender Activism for Males

Females seem extremely skilled at defending their interests verbally, getting social and group support, garnering sympathy of the masses, of law makers, even getting academic recognition for their private agenda. Men are lone hunters who just are getting overpowered by the social might of the feminists.

Or maybe men need protective laws, like feminists? So they don’t get into jail for following their normal instincts while they are not harming anyone! Like jail for looking at photos.

The dangerousness of the pedophile hunters (see these youtube threats & comments)

1. Note that these people want to kill Jack McClellan, the "law abiding pedophile"
2. A harmless guy who enjoys young girls, but never harmed one and never touched a minor sexually.
3. His main problem is that he is naive enough to be out of the closet. He is honest, he admits his sexual attraction to young girls 4-11. If he kept quiet, he would not have a problem.

• Geitje007 @mumuluku123
  I would have done the same!!! Torture him foreverrrrr fucking bastard!!!! 1 week ago
• MaIcoImZieI @mumuluku123 You are so full of shit. You act like this guy actually mudererd and raped people. Shut the fuck up man. I’m sick of people like you talking shit about how you are going to torture paedophiles. Shut the fuck up. 1 week ago
• sarahsmith995 i hope he dies a horrid death! 1 week ago
• Kingler91 do a suicide, and tell all ur subscribers at that fucking website of yours to do the same, and maybe people will let their children out.
  Hope you die with alot of suffering. Would laugh my ass off if i saw you dead in the street. Fuck you. Goodbye 2 weeks ago
• TheN1PlaylistChannel @mumuluku123 i wish i would see this animal in the street so i could punch him so hard that he would end up like a vegetable in his death bed i hope he ends up in prison OF COURSE FOR ANOTHER CRIME AND NOT HURTING AN INNOCENT CHILD and ones this animal is in prison for all the inmates to rape him and stab him to death.THE WAY I SEE IT ANYBODY HURTS AN INNOCENT CHILD DESERVES A BULLET TO THE HEAD PERIOD NO MERCY 3 weeks ago

Much more about vigilante "pedophile" hunters: Click on "More"

• mumuluku123 @pawel i think we could cut him from the scrotum to his throat with a dull tea spoon
  slowly and shit on his dead body. twist his neck. fuck it. we should kill him in a jack the ripper way with a ed gein and hannibal lector twist 2 2 weeks ago
• pawel @mumuluku123
  yeahhh worddd…
  i would to do the same fuckin thing, but in a more brutal fuckin way 2 weeks ago
• Fmxsupasta @tgoodfella deffintly not lying hes been arrested for pedo shit lol sadly he is most deffintly for real. jack mclellan should be dragged out and lynched. 4 weeks ago
• 1978ipswichtillidie this guy not steve the other one is a sick dirty fucking messed up peodophile who needs to be shot like all the other pedophiles 4 weeks ago
• flavour1970 wish they had of turned the cameras off for 5 minutes and let steve hammer the fuck 3 weeks ago
• TheRailwaystationist Way to destroy a good setup. Instead of tearing into the guys mind, this stupid fuck of a host can’t control his rage and personal feelings, which completely ruins the interview.
  I seriously wanted to know what went on in this guys mind, but after watching the complete show, I still feel pretty clueless.
  This is by far the worst interviewer ever. 3 weeks ago
• tgoodfella for some reason i think this guy is lying to be on TV or wants attention. I hope this fucker isn’t this sick, because if he is, then the world could do with out him or anybody else like him. The world has limited resouces, get rid of these sick fuckers, and violent criminals. 1 month ago

Boy "victim": "Jan was hot!"  Young people’s sex, a crime? A 22 year old women who had consensual sex with a 15 year old boy, is on a sex registry for a lifetime and gets death threats. The boy "victim" says: "Jan was hot".

I know I will lose most of my readers here, because everyone has been brainwashed that pedophilia is a crime and extremely damaging to children. Even though it was the norm in ancient Greece, and the bible is full of prophets and saints marrying 12 year olds. All research that seems to prove that non-violent pedophilia is not harmful, is actively repressed. Impeccable reputable academic research condemned by the US senate by a 99 to 0 vote.

“Child Abuse” Dogmatists Repress Scientific Research
Sexual Desire for Pre-Pubescent Children. The worst of all crimes?
Teenage Sexuality Witch Hunt

I know, I should be quiet, any academic who dares to do unbiased research will suffer character assassination.

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.