Posted on 04/16/2002 12:29:02 PM PDT by FormerLib
Intellectually respectable pedophilia? What's next?Sensitivity classes?
Ooohhh, now it all makes sense! My being personally offended at the thought of my children being attacked by a pervert, well, that’s just evidence that I’m a pervert! My, to think how many times I’ve embarrassed myself by being opposed to practices like this!
Well, thank you Ms. Levine, I haven’t felt this enlightened since I realized that the reason that I thought homosexuality was an abomination in The Lord’s Eyes, was because I was a homosexual.
Now, if I can just get over this thing I have with an anger towards muslim terrorists… Well, time to start kneeling, anyone know which direction Mecca is in?
Owl_Eagle
”Guns Before Butter.”
-------------------------
At some point is there really that much difference? Hands off the kids.
The so-called "journalistic community" has a tough time differentiating pedophilia (attraction to pre-pubescent kids) from the attraction to sexually-developed but legislatively-underaged adolescents. To lump them all together is erroneous.
There was a thread here at FR back a few weeks in which someone posted the correct term for people who are sexually attracted to the sexually ripe but legally underaged - a type of behaviour far, far removed from pedophilia. Anyone have a link or remember the proper terminology?
The Roman Catholic Church, of late, has had ITS problems with "pederasty," sex between an adult male and an underaged male. Once again, wholly different from pedophilia OR hetero-but-underaged sex. No one seems to be able to get the term right.
Michael
"Pedophilia Chic" Reconsidered - The taboo against sex with children continues to erode
"...For elsewhere in the public square, the defense of adult-child sex—more accurately, man-boy sex—is now out in the open. Moreover, it is on parade in a number of places—therapeutic, literary, and academic circles; mainstream publishing houses and journals and magazines and bookstores—where the mere appearance of such ideas would until recently have been not only unthinkable, but in many cases, subject to prosecution...
...Plainly, as the record even then showed, a surprising number of voices were willing to rise up on behalf of what advocates refer to as "man-boy love," or what most people call sexual abuse..."
For one thing, no sustained public challenges have arisen over other primal taboos. Even more telling, if nihilism and nihilism alone were the explanation for public attempts to legitimize sex with boy children, then we would expect the appearance of related attempts to legitimize sex with girl children; and these we manifestly do not see. Nobody, but nobody, has been allowed to make the case for girl pedophilia with the backing of any reputable institution. Publishing houses are not putting out acclaimed anthologies and works of fiction that include excerpts of men having sex with young girls. Psychologists and psychiatrists are not competing with each other to publish studies demonstrating that the sexual abuse of girls is inconsequential; or, indeed, that it ought not even be defined as "abuse."
It's probably a good thing that this term is coming to light as the link between ephebophilia becomes clearly documented in light of recent events in the news.
Or am I the only one noticing that the charges against those rogue priests show them overwhelmingly assaulting boys?
Actually, there IS that much of a difference. Because the behaviors are diffferent. The pedo is attracted to kids who are not sexually self-aware (or sexually sentient). Once puberty hits, the pedo has no further interest and moves on. The OTHER behavior is the perversion of being attracted to dramatically younger but nonetheless sexually sentient partners - i.e., fully-developed but underaged teen girls.
What has caused the perversion in the language is the legislative insistence that every person even one day younger than 18 is a "child." This leads to situations where a nude photo of a girl aged 17 years 364 days is "child porn" and the same photo of the same girl taken 24 hours later is "legal erotica." Whenever arbitririness enters into the picture, lines of behavior get blurred and linguistic precision goes out the window.
Michael
Oh, you wouldn't want to hear what they had to say anyway. They'd tell you that the traume these young people experience is the result of either society's "homophobia," in the case of boys, or it patriarchalism, in the case of girls!
Anything, anything but actually blaming the culprits of sexual perversion!
You're certainly not the only one noticing, but the news media is very uncomfortable in portraying these priests as pederasts, by definition the practitioners of homosexual behavior with underaged partners. As usual, the media either cannot get it right - or they refuse to.
Michael
Thanks - couldn't remember it offhand.
Of course, ephebophilia used to go by a different name here in The Colonies back about 200 years or so ago. Back then, it was called "taking a wife." Low life expectancy rates almost mandated early marriage.
Michael
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.