Following the removal of NAMbLA’s membership, the ILGA began a hypocritical campaign against alternate sexuality, supporting only the popular and accepted sexual minorities, while rejecting any controversial sexual minorities which were deemed dangerous to support. This is, of course, against the very ideologies which formed the founding principles of the ILGA; a group which was formed to support oppressed sexual minorities.
The ILGA deny having ever supported paedophiles, which is not true. In fact, when groups such as the ILGA deny having ever supported paedophiles, they are being utterly dishonest. Gay rights activists have fought hand-in-hand with paedophile activists in the past, the most notable of those alliances being the LGBT presence of Ian Dunn in the founding of PIE, an alliance which gay rights activists are desperately trying to erase from the minds of the public.
Caving in to political pressure, the ILGA and other similar groups now “support” discrimination against paedophiles, despite their principles favouring the defence of oppressed sexual minorities. This is an example of what happens in societies which “promote liberty” for certain groups. The UN - a multi-governmental organisation - does indeed promise to support supossedly oppressed minorities, but only if that minority has support from the voting public of member countries. Unfortunately, this attitude of “positive liberty” further increases the gulf between the accepted minorities and the unaccepted minorities. When these accepted minorities are handed both protective legislation and encouraged to ditch their unpopular allies, a situation is created wherein the unaccepted minorities are vastly unequal to others. This is, of course, contrary to the official aims of such legislation.
Now, in order to investigate all possibilities for this unacceptable level of hatred, one must also consider the possibility that many LGBT people genuinely do hate paedophiles. This hatred is highly hypocritical when one considers that, at their roots, both paedophilia and homosexuality are equally harmless attractions which should not be subjected to moral analysis. Sadly, it is not uncommon for those who have been subjected to bullying and bigotry to become bigots and bullies themselves. This appears to be what is happening with some members of the LGBT community.
I personally feel that people - on a purely instinctive level - harbour a similar feeling of (unacceptable) disgust towards both same-gender attraction and minor-attraction. Social conditioning has led to the relative acceptance of homosexuals, however minor-attraction is subject to a negative form of social conditioning which does nothing except encourage prejudism.
One of the ironies of this situation is that - although little research has been conducted in the area (for reasons of political correctness) - it is likely that homosexuality and paedophilia are linked. It is estimated that around 11% of the population of the developed, adult-attracted world is homosexual. The prevalence of same-gender attraction within the paedophile community is much greater.
Many people use sex offender data to estimate the genders preferred by child molesters. While this data proves a same-gender attraction rate of around 33% in child molesters, this data is not representative of the attractions present in paedophiles, as most child molesters are situational offenders rather than paedophiles [2]. A situational offender who molests children is likely to abuse a child of his preferred gender in adults, which artificially raises the level of opposite-gender attraction attributed to paedophiles. Clearly, when so many non-paedophiles are included in the figures - when only ~11% of them are homosexual - the percentage of paedophiles with same-gender attraction will appear to be smaller than it really is. It is likely that more than 33% of paedophiles are attracted to children of the same gender
So, when you consider that such a large number of paedophiles have same-gender attraction, it becomes apparent that there is a link between homosexuality and paedophilia. This link is denied, not just because many homosexuals dislike paedophiles, but because of legislation which protects accepted minorities yet ignores the minorities which have not yet been accepted.
“Positive Liberty,” the oxymoronic term which describes the legislation promoting inequality disguised as anti-discrimination laws, must be fought against, in order to support true equality for all minorities.
[1] - http://anu.nfshost.com/?p=119
[2] - http://anu.nfshost.com/?p=79
Comments
Hide the following 19 comments
bollox
24.07.2007 23:44
as far as i'm concerned paedophilia is fucked. arguing that it's ok cos your only attracted to children, and not actually raping them is also bullshit.
i'd be interested in other peoples responses to this post, but personally i think you should attempt to find solidarity elsewhere, as you won't find it here.
queer
RE: bollox
25.07.2007 00:54
The fact that same-gender attraction occurs with a much greater frequency within paedophiles should be evidence that there is a link between homosexuality and paedophilia.
BLueRibbon
e-mail: blribbon@fastmail.fm
Homepage: http://anu.nfshost.com/
How dare you, you b*stard!
25.07.2007 08:01
You need to shake your f*cking head mate and get in touch with reality.
Paedophilia is the most egregious act of all humanity towards any child, you moron.
I am proud to say I am a fag-hag and I love my gay mates and there is nothing paedophilic in their nature by any means or sorts. Homosexuals are not paedophiles... they have absolutely nothing in common.
What I have a very clear problem is with apologist jackasses like yourself who need to be sectioned under the mental health act; in my mind - your train of thought is most sickening and definitely depraved.
And lets be clear on this matter - crystal clear: what I despise is the paedophile who hides behind the gay banner, purporting to be homosexual and instead being the gravest threat to all humanities children - a paedophile.
Homosexuals are not a threat to society - they are a valuable part of it as love is love, no matter what the gender. Sexually preying on the weakest and smallest individuals in society is the most violent act against all of society as the ramifications and scarring of a sexual assault against a child last a lifetime and reach deep into the family unity creating chaos and mahem, so much so, it inevitably then spills over into the community.
All paedophiles should be classed as dangerous offenders - full stop. A dangerous offender is defined by two factors:1. the severity of his crime 2. the likelihood to recommit the offence.
Why aren't they classed as such? Who writes the laws and who bangs the gavel?
I saw my mate in court, after being yet again assaulted in a courtroom, arrested on a fraudulently obtained warrant and held in cells over night, only to be brought up into the docks by two CERCO staff... what was her crime? She states clearly, "Stop killing children for money." - Barbara Tucker
Immediately before she was brought into the dock, I watched a man in a nice suit walk freely into the courtroom and confidently stroll into the dock. He plead guily to having some 2500 images of children of a sexual nature, some 500 movies and he plead guilty to charge after charger after charge after charge after charge.
THEN HE WAS GIVEN UNCONDITIONAL BAIL.
THE B*STARD WALKED OUT OF THE COURTROOM FREE A S A BIRD AWAITING HIS SENTENCE WHICH WILL TURN OUT TO BE A SLAP ON THE WRIST.
HOW MANY CHILDREN SUFFERED EXTREME SEXUAL VIOLENCE FOR HIS SEXUAL GRATIFICATION?
WHAT *SSHOLE OF SOCIETY WOULD CONDONE THIS BEHAVIOUR LET ALONE STATE THAT NONSES HAVE RIGHTS?
IS ANYONE IS THIS COUNTRY PREPARED TO PROTECT THE RIGHTS OF THE CHILD?
WHERE ARE THE MEN AND WOMEN WITH BOLLOCKS IN THIS GREAT NATION?
ISN'T IT TIME WE CALLED A SPADE A SPADE AND PERMANENTLY SEGREGATED ALL THE PAEDOPHILES FROM ENGLISH SOCIETY? ASK ANY PERSON ON THE STREET AND I AM CERTAIN THEY WILL SUGGEST A FAR MORE VIOLENT RESPONSE TO THESE IMMORAL MENTALLY ILL PEOPLE.
THEY NEED TO BE LOCKED UP FOR THEIR OWN GOOD AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, TO PROTECT THE CHILDREN.
Choke on that response... bloody nonse apologists ... hell is a long time a blazing!
Charity Sweet XXX
Charity Sweet
e-mail: charitysweet@hotmail.co.uk
??
25.07.2007 08:36
Ilyan
what the fuck?
25.07.2007 10:50
should we support rape as well - after all, desire for sex without consent is just another form of sexuality, right?
the brief intersection between the gay rights movement and NAMBLA scum and their ilk was a mistake which the vast majority of activists and radicals have moved away from. to try and claim that somehow the struggles have ANYTHING in common is completely fucked.
why is this shit even still on the newswire?
for another view, see: http://libcom.org/blog/saii/childlove-and-no-platform-04052007
rasputin
RE: How dare you, you b*stard!
25.07.2007 11:19
Of course, your problem is with the fact that paedophiles have an attraction which you find distasteful, isn't it? You expect heteros to support gays even though they find your thoughts distasteful, yet you aren't prepared to afford the same respect to people who have thoughts which you don't like. To be honest, my friend, you do not deserve that level of respect when you are prepared to attack others for their thoughts.
The fact that a small number of paedophiles (and yes, it is small relative to the population of paedophiles) abuse children should not be used to attack those who do not offend. Most child molesters are adult-attracted people anyway - http://anu.nfshost.com/?p=79
Most paedophiles are not a threat to children, indeed a HUGE number of paedophiles work with children. The reason that you (and many others) make insane assumptions is that don't hear about the people who don't offend, for obvious reasons.
Paedophilia is not uncommon, nor is it immoral unless acted upon. You couldn't possibly section all paedophiles, simply because there are so many of us. There are actually more paedophiles than homosexuals - http://anu.nfshost.com/2007/occurrence-of-paedophilia-in-the-general-population
Anyway, using sex offenders to describe paedophiles is no more sensible than using rapists to describe heteros and gays. I am not an apologist for "nonces" (sex offenders), I am a defender of paedophiles, people who are sexually attracted to young children. Get used to it, because this kind of activism is growing very quickly indeed.
BLueRibbon
e-mail: blribbon@fastmail.fm
Homepage: http://anu.nfshost.com/
I am not supporting sex with children
25.07.2007 12:17
I AM supporting people who have a sexual attraction to children but do not engage in such behaviour. I'd like to hear specifically why people have a problem with this support. NOBODY should be attacked because of their thoughts.
BLueRibbon
e-mail: blribbon@fastmail.fm
Homepage: http://anu.nfshost.com/
7 comments?
25.07.2007 12:27
why?
OTHERS MIGHT HAVE INTEREST IN THE RETORT TO THIS, TOO. . . .
7
BLueRibbon
25.07.2007 13:06
"I AM supporting people who have a sexual attraction to children but do not engage in such behaviour. I'd like to hear specifically why people have a problem with this support. NOBODY should be attacked because of their thoughts."
If you are supporting those people's use of child pornography, then you are supporting the rape of children. It's been long established that child pornography perpetuates child rape by creating a demand for those images. Go read up on the Met's Child Porn Units' work if you are in any doubt.
Would you be fighting for the rights of people who are sexually aroused by raping adults? And I don't mean the role-play fantasists whose consensual games bear almost no resemblance to actual rape, but the kind of people who find the real violent act sexually arousing?
And for fucking starters, when did the sexualisation of children become a human right??? The protection of children overrides the right of any dodgy person's wanking fantasies.
"NOBODY should be attacked because of their thoughts."
Hey, don't mix up Freedom of Speech with the freedom to say what you like. We all live in a society and we all have basic human rights. If you think freedom of expression means you can go around inciting violence on others, you are in for a shock.
I think you need your head examined!
Now how about supporting the rights of people who get excited by the fantasy of dragging nonces behind a car for 300 miles... but conveniently "have no desire to actually do it"?
You on board?
A Gog
Breaches indy guidelines
25.07.2007 13:53
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2007/07/376841.html is a copy & paste from http://www.anu.nfshost.com/
It also tries to equate homosexuality and paedophilia
& article titled 'Text S.O.S. - Classifying all paedophiles as dangerous offenders' http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2007/07/376915.html is a response.
Both should be removed.
Anon
RE: BLueRibbon
25.07.2007 15:15
"Child pornography" does not refer to the rape of children. Non-pornographic images can be illegal in the UK - http://www.sentencing-guidelines.gov.uk/guidelines/other/courtappeal/default.asp?T=Cases&catID=5&subject=PORNOGRAPHY&SubSubject=Making%20and%20distributing%20indecent%20photographs%20of%20a%20child
I explained my views about child pornography, here - http://anu.nfshost.com/?p=108 If you want a real answer to your question, I suggest that you read the article in full, because the issue is so complex that it requires an article of that length. I discussed the issue of child pornography with many friends, including those who have been convicted of offences involving child pornography, as well as those who are old enough to remember a time when child pornography was legal and was as available as adult pornography. They have discussed the issue in great detail in order to aid me in writing that article, explaining the motivations for producing, distributing, trading and possessing such material. I feel this gives me a reasonable level of insight into the issue, without taking the risk of engaging in criminal activity.
Here's a relevant excerpt -
****It is often claimed that possessing indecent images of children is harmful to children; many people refer to supply and demand theories. When child pornography is purchased, this claim is undeniably true - purchasing child pornography will increase the supply - and if the images purchased/”demanded” are abusive, then the purchaser is contributing to the abuse of children. I am not arguing against criminalising the purchase of child pornography.... I believe that such actions should be illegal in the case of Level 2 indecent images and above. The problem with applying the supply and demand theory to people who possess but don’t purchase is that they are not contributing to demand, because the supplier is not interested in producing images for people who are effectively “stealing” them by downloading them for free, for the same reasons that artists don’t record music for people downloading it from file sharing networks. Supply and demand is an economic theory which applies to commercial sale, not products being used for free. Producers of any material do not want their material to be used freely, so an increased interest in freely available pornography is going to harm them. People will be less likely to purchase child pornography if viewing freely available child pornography is legalised, as viewing freely available child pornography will become the safe option. Production of child pornography will therefore fall because of a lack of demand, meaning that less children will be abused by child pornographers.****
At the moment, I can't even look at naturist photographs because I would risk arrest. That angers me, considering that the UK is the ONLY country which prohibits non-sexual nudity.
"Would you be fighting for the rights of people who are sexually aroused by raping adults? And I don't mean the role-play fantasists whose consensual games bear almost no resemblance to actual rape, but the kind of people who find the real violent act sexually arousing?"
If they act upon their fantasies, I of course do not support them, but fantasy harms nobody. Many people (both paedophiles and non-paedophiles) fantasise about abusive activity but don't engage in it - http://anu.nfshost.com/2007/understanding-fantasy
"And for fucking starters, when did the sexualisation of children become a human right??? The protection of children overrides the right of any dodgy person's wanking fantasies."
I don't think that fantasising about children harms them. If you can somehow explain how mere fantasy is abusive, please enlighten us.
"Hey, don't mix up Freedom of Speech with the freedom to say what you like. We all live in a society and we all have basic human rights. If you think freedom of expression means you can go around inciting violence on others, you are in for a shock."
I'm not inciting violence or any other act. I'm demanding that paedophiles be treated as equals in society.
"I think you need your head examined!"
You're not the first to say that and you won't be the last, but people can't be cured of an attraction to children, for the same reasons that people can't be cured of same-gender attraction. If you are angry because I don't feel ashamed about my orientation, that's really none of your business.
"Now how about supporting the rights of people who get excited by the fantasy of dragging nonces behind a car for 300 miles... but conveniently "have no desire to actually do it"?"
I don't have a problem with them *fantasising* about doing it to even non-offending paedophiles, despite the fact that it's an utterly idiotic thing to fantasise about. For the record, I am not a sex offender.
BLueRibbon
e-mail: blribbon@fastmail.fm
Homepage: http://anu.nfshost.com/
Nonce sense
25.07.2007 16:28
Oh, I must be a complete moron for confusing some who has sexual urges revolving around raping children as being in a state of violent ideation. Sex with a child is rape. A child is not intellectually developed enough to give true consent. So it's rape! And given that it can never be consensual it is a violent ideation.
Now you are telling us that Internet child porn swapping isn't dangerous to children! Try telling that to the kids who have been put through years of rape for that very activity. What has money to do with supply and demand in a barter system, is that Nonce Economics?
Children have to be raped to create the porn. So by that token, child porn users ARE offenders.
Go seek help. There is nothing normal about your sex drive.
A Gog
RE: Nonce sense
25.07.2007 18:27
"Now you are telling us that Internet child porn swapping isn't dangerous to children!"
I am not. You didn't read the whole article that I linked to. I recommended that you should read the whole article because many hysterical people take excerpts out of context.
"Go seek help."
What exactly do you think will happen? Again, paedophilia can't be cured, for the same reasons that homosexuality can't be cured. Ironically, around two years ago, I considered "seeking help," but didn't because people such as yourself made it dangerous to admit to being a paedophile. Instead, I decided to advocate the acceptance of paedophiles. I'm now aware that paedophilia can't be cured, so I will spend my life advocating paedophile acceptance instead.
"There is nothing normal about your sex drive"
It's more common than (adult-attracted) homosexuality, but in reality, both an attraction to minors and same-gender attraction is normal. If you're going to use the frequency of occurrence to judge the normality of sexuality, then you are essentially arguing that homosexuality is less normal than paedophilia.
BLueRibbon
e-mail: blribbon@fastmail.fm
Homepage: http://anu.nfshost.com/
Our survey says, "eh-uh!!!"
25.07.2007 20:17
Is that purely anecdotal or did someone take the time to cook up such pseudoscientific garbage for Nonce Monthly? It obviously isn't the conclusion of any serious research that has been peer reviewed.
A Gog
Occurrence of paedophilia in the general population
25.07.2007 21:33
Is that purely anecdotal or did someone take the time to cook up such pseudoscientific garbage for Nonce Monthly? It obviously isn't the conclusion of any serious research that has been peer reviewed."
http://anu.nfshost.com/2007/occurrence-of-paedophilia-in-the-general-population (A collection of links to real studies)
There may be more gay people than paedophiles posting here, but most paedophiles are frightened to speak out, for obvious reasons.
BLueRibbon
e-mail: blribbon@fastmail.fm
Homepage: http://anu.nfshost.com/
okay, lemme ask you this...
25.07.2007 21:46
your thoughts are in your head. nobody's stopping you having those thoughts. it is a biological impossibility.
so we're left with two options:
- you fantasise but do not act, in which case nobody is stopping you and your campaign is pointless;
- you are trying to normalise paedophilic fantasies as a route to normalising paedophilic behaviour.
which is it?
oh, and by the way - your statement that "you expect heterosexuals to tolerate homosexuality even though they find your behaviou disgraceful" is fucking idiotic. further, your constant attempts to associate homosexuality with paedophilia put you to the right of the BNP in most respects.
when did Indymedia become a forum for paedos?
rasputin
RE:
25.07.2007 22:54
What do you think happens to paedophiles when they "seek help?" You state below that "stopping those thoughts [..] is a biological impossibility." I would genuinely appreciate an answer to this question, because it's a frequently made statement which nobody ever provides reasoning for.
"your thoughts are in your head. nobody's stopping you having those thoughts. it is a biological impossibility.
so we're left with two options:
- you fantasise but do not act, in which case nobody is stopping you and your campaign is pointless;
- you are trying to normalise paedophilic fantasies as a route to normalising paedophilic behaviour.
which is it?"
(a) There's a chance that people will find out about my orientation. I really like to spend time with kids (which is currently impossible due to the fact that I am refusing to associate with adults except at bars, shops, etc), *so people will start asking questions about my orientation*. I have an extremely strong emotional attraction to children - not *just* sexual attraction - so I *can't* just spend time with adults. If people find out about my orientation in this country, I will have major problems, *unless paedophilic fantasies are accepted*. I'm also considered to be rather attractive (I'm 18) and it's really awkward when women (occassionaly men, because of my mannerisms) express interest in me at bars, music shows, etc. I could claim to be a regular homosexual, but I don't feel that I should have to do that, nor would it help in the case of men. I also wish to meet other people like myself, but this is currently very dangerous; most paedophile activists don't even know each other's real names. It's also a point of principle - why should I tolerate anti-paedophile attitudes? I may have a relatively thick skin, but when I see a headline such as "Paedo molests 30 kids," it makes me really fucking angry because a paedophile is NOT a child molester.
(b) I do feel that the possession of prohibited images should be legal unless the offender purchases, requests, trades, distributes, produces, or otherwises encourages or aids abuse. Of course, images can be illegal without any abuse having ever taken place, as any child nudity would qualify as "indecent" and therefore illegal. At the moment, I can't even view naturist photographs, which angers me.
"when did Indymedia become a forum for paedos?"
It's not a forum for paedophiles, but we need to have some representation in activist circles. The paedophile activism movement is growing rapidly and this must be represented.
BLueRibbon
e-mail: blribbon@fastmail.fm
Homepage: http://anu.nfshost.com/
rasputin
25.07.2007 22:58
A Gog
Sorry!
25.07.2007 23:13
Well sorry, but we all a bit busy with our Justice for Gary Glitter campaign. But you might like to support us by buying our benefit CD, 'Free Ian Huntly!"
I bet you're a pair of bored students just winding people up. I hope you are, because otherwise you are living in Cloud Cuckooland.
A Gog