Grandpa Billy has got his white undies wedged firmly up his arse in his latest “I told you so!” blog. This time he thinks that there are plans afoot to legalise paedophilia. He can’t distinguish between a few rat bags and the rest of the world.
Those who want to see normalised sexual relations with children have been very vocal of late. Of course they have long been making these demands, and they have had a long relationship with the homosexual rights movement as I have documented in my book Strained Relations.
There are lots of vocal people out there – but who’s listening? Nobody really. Oh, and if you want to really know what’s going on, buy his book.
In fact, the homosexual activists have long called for the lowering of the age of consent – or abolishing it all together.
Which ones? Oh, we have to buy your book. In any case, that’s just bullshit. There is nobody calling for a lowering of the age of consent and certainly nobody is suggesting that it be abolished.
Sadly they are not alone in all this. Just recently a leading legal eagle in the UK called for the age to be dropped to 13, to stop the ‘persecution of old men’! Yes, that is what she actually said. As a newspaper report says:
“A senior human rights barrister has sparked a storm of outrage after calling for the age of consent to be lowered to 13 in order to prevent the ‘persecution of old men’. Barbara Hewson made the controversial suggestion in an article for the online magazine ‘Spiked’. In the column, Hewson, who is a barrister at Hardwicke in London, stated that the move was necessary in the wake of the Savile scandal. She refers to Operation Yewtree as the ‘Savile Inquisition’ and describes its inquiry as reminiscent of Soviet-era Russia. She goes on to suggest some of the offences investigated were ‘low level misdemeanours’.”
Well yes, she does call for the age of consent to be lowered to 13. I don’t think that means it’s going to happen. It’s best to read her full article to get an understanding for the reasons why, something I doubt Grandpa Billy has done. She is but a lone voice, there simply isn’t a groundswell of support for her idea and quickly the concept was dismissed.
But worse yet, there are now many “experts” who are arguing that paedophilia is an innate predisposition and orientation, just like is claimed about homosexuality.
Here we go again, making a link between paedophilia and homosexuality. You know, it matters not to the average person whether or not paedophilia is innate. If it is innate it makes it no more acceptable. Billy is trying really hard to link the age of consent with homosexuals and paedophiles. In his mind the deviants are trying to get access to the kiddies and must be stopped!
A number of illustrations of this can be provided here. Take for example this ominous headline: “Some homosexual activist groups a ‘dream’ to pedophiles”. The piece begins as follows:
“Two psychologists testified before a parliamentary session on a bill related to sexual assault on children that pedophilia is a ‘sexual orientation’ just like homosexuality or heterosexuality. Lifesitenews reported on the testimony at a parliamentary session in Canada regarding a bill intended to increase mandatory minimum sentences on child sex offenders for particular crimes.
“Dr. Vernon Quinsey and Dr. Hubert Van Gijseghem were testifying on how offenders responded to treatment. Van Gijseghem, psychologist and retired professor of the University of Montreal, said, ‘Pedophiles are not simply people who commit a small offense from time to time but rather are grappling with what is equivalent to a sexual orientation just like another individual may be grappling with heterosexuality or even homosexuality.’ He went on to say, ‘True pedophiles have an exclusive preference for children, which is the same as having a sexual orientation. You cannot change this person’s sexual orientation. He may, however, remain abstinent’.”
We find here the same line used for homosexuals: this is an orientation from which no change is possible. And just as groups like the American Psychiatric Association (APA) were hounded by the militants to change their stance on homosexuality, so too the paedophile activists are trying to do the same thing.
Of course, it’s about what he leaves out. Grandpa Billy is right, these trained and professional people recognise that paedophiles can’t simply change. Billy no doubt thinks that they can, probably by praying over them. I’d sooner take the word of people in the relevant scientific disciplines than a religious nutter in Melbourne’s outer east. The article goes on to say:
Dr. Quinsey, professor emeritus of psychology at Queen’s University in Kingston, Ontario, agreed with Van Gijseghem. Quinsey said pedophiles’ sexual interests prefer children and “There is no evidence that this sort of preference can be changed through treatment or through anything else.”
Van Gijseghem and Quinsey’s views are not unique. Harvard Health Publications said in July 2010 that, “Pedophilia is a sexual orientation and unlikely to change. Treatment aims to enable someone to resist acting on his sexual urges.”
See – they are simply acknowledging the way things are, they are not calling for paedophiles to be allowed access to children. “Treatment aims to enable someone to resist ..sexual urges”
Another alarming piece entitled “Many researchers taking a different view of pedophilia” in the Los Angeles Times also notes how so many of our sexperts are arguing that paedophilia is an unchangeable condition. It begins with a “case study” of a man who claims his desires for children are intrinsic to who he is. It then says this:
“In the laboratory, researchers are coming to the same conclusion. Like many forms of sexual deviance, pedophilia once was thought to stem from psychological influences early in life. Now, many experts view it as a sexual orientation as immutable as heterosexuality or homosexuality. It is a deep-rooted predisposition — limited almost entirely to men — that becomes clear during puberty and does not change. The best estimates are that between 1% and 5% of men are pedophiles, meaning that they have a dominant attraction to prepubescent children.”
Once again we see this as a mere “sexual orientation” which we are meant to simply accept.
Once again Grandpa Billy leaves out the important part of the article.
Not all pedophiles molest children. Nor are all child molesters pedophiles. Studies show that about half of all molesters are not sexually attracted to their victims. They often have personality disorders or violent streaks, and their victims are typically family members.
By contrast, pedophiles tend to think of children as romantic partners and look beyond immediate relatives. They include chronic abusers familiar from the headlines — Catholic priests, coaches and generations of Boy Scout leaders.
This I would think is an important part of the discussion. Adults who molest children may not be sexually attracted to their victim. They often have personality disorders, much like some religious fundamentalist have a personality disorder.
And the real worry here is this: in numerous places laws are being enacted which makes it a criminal offence to “discriminate” against anyone based on their “sexual orientation”. So the obvious concern here is this: if paedophilia is just another sexual orientation, must we now accept, embrace and promote it like we now must do with homosexuality?
And here is Grandpa Billy at the top of the slippery slide. Nobody anywhere, apart from the nutcases, is suggesting that the age of consent is lowered or that laws be passed to enable adults to have sex with children. So paedophilia may be innate, that simply means we change the way we deal with those so afflicted. It should be clear that therapy won’t change their orientation, and drugs will have a limited effect, so we must find alternatives to protect the adult and more importantly to reduce the risk to the children. Grandpa is right, we should not discriminate against a paedophile, so we shouldn’t deny them access to a house or a job, but if they commit a crime, that’s different. When you offend, the whole game changes. I don’t have an answer as to how that happens, but for those offenders, regardless of their orientation or reasons, they must be excluded from society. Lock them up.
But thanks to the homosexual activists, we now are having a very hard time saying no to any of this. Indeed, we know things will not stop there. Soon every conceivable “sexual orientation” imaginable will be argued for and publically championed – and eventually legalised. You see, there is still so much “sexual inequality and injustice” which needs to be dealt with.
Oh poor Grandpa Billy, because the gays are being treated in the right way we have to treat everyone else in the same way. Because we let the gays have sex with each other and don’t lock them up that means that we have to let people have sex with whoever and whatever they want. The subtext is that homosexuality should be again criminalised. Billy can’t distinguish between someone’s innate nature and then offending. Just because you want to do something doesn’t mean you can. Most of the world understands this.
Nobody is seriously suggesting that the age of consent be abolished, nobody is calling for rape to be legal, nobody is calling for sex with animals to be legal and nobody is calling for sex between adult christian fundamentals to be outlawed.
That last one would be a good idea. Stop them breeding.