Firstly, before I get to the main topic, I predict that the next chapter of GBM will be done this week. It will for sure be done within the next two, however I’m hoping that I’ll have enough time this week to polish and perfect it enough to be able to make it available to you all. Thanks for being so patient.
For some weird reason, pedophilia is in the news. Or at least it is in my area, but I’ve seen posts talking about it from other areas too, so I think it’s currently on the global tongue more than usual. I’ve seen a TED talk get released talking about pedophilia as an unchangeable orientation, I’ve seen people getting mad at Facebook posts about ‘love is love’ posters featuring arguments for the legalization of pedophilia, and recently, Nathan Larson of Charlottesville, Virginia ran for Congress with a platform boasting attempting to legalize pedophilia.
There is a lot to unpack here. So much, I barely know where to start. So, I’ll start with my own take on pedophilia. Having sex with a child is wrong, legally and morally. In Canada, where I live, young people aged 12 or 13 can consent to have sex with people up to two years older (so for 12-year-olds, they can have sex with 13 or 14-year old without legal repercussions) but anything older is statutory rape. Young people aged 14 or 15 can consent to having sex with people up to five years older, or, as previously mentioned, two years younger, but anything else is statutory rape. For most other scenarios, the age of consent is 16, except if the sexual activity is exploitative (for instance, if there is prostitution or porn creation involved, or if the relationship is one of trust, such as a student-teacher relationship), in which case the age of consent is 18. So, yippee, apart from that one scene where Megan jumps her teacher, there’s no statutory rape in even my most controversial work.
I like how the age of consent in Canada works. If it were up to me the exploitative part would be extended to 21 so people could be more mature and sure of what they’re doing before they’re thrust into sex work or taken advantage of by a smooth-talking teacher, but hey, the laws are what they are. Pedophilia as an action is wrong. People born with pedophilic tendencies should never act on their urges.
Here’s where things get tricky. People don’t just wake up one day deciding they want to have sex with children. I do believe that this is not a sickness acquired, but rather that some people are born sick. Plagued, knowing their attractions but also smart enough to know they can never act on it. I’d even wager that one or two people reading this know they’re attracted to minors, but can never speak of it or act on their urges. And honestly, to them I say, good for you. You’re making sure you never harm another. I see no difference in someone born with attractions to minors never letting it shine and people with anger management problems learning to stop abusing people.
There’s a reason that when pedophiles are on the news, barely ever do people say, “Really? THAT guy?” It’s because odds are a decent number of people have pedophilic tendencies, but the ones that are ultimately pedophiles have no self-control and are okay with harming others. That’s why shame befalls them. the sickness is unfortunate, but turning a blind eye to it and having sex with minors is not okay. Not ever.
I know that sex story communities are pretty open sexually, which is the main reason I feel so comfortable expressing my opinion that openly. And hey, fun fact: if you agree with me, you actually agree with the main point of the controversial TED talk – their main point is that people with pedophilic tendencies who have not expressed it in any way have done nothing wrong. I agree with that. It also asserts that pedophilia should be looked at more as a sickness, which has led a bunch of hasty-thinking people to believe that the TED talk advocates making it a recognized sexual orientation instead of a disorder (which the video did not do). This led other people to assume the video advocated for pedophilia to be legalized, which it did not do at all. But hey, that’s the Internet for you, right?
When it comes to those posters with the pride flag on them saying ‘love is love,’ it’s perfectly understandable to be disgusted by that, because, duh, pedophilia is harmful. However, it is not okay to assume that pedophilia belongs in any way with the LGBTQ+ community, or that they advocate for pedophilia, or even tolerate it. Even a quick glance at the history of the LGBTQ+ community will tell you that its opponents always tried to discredit the movement by tying it to pedophilia or claiming that being gay leads you to being a pedophile, or they’re just as bad, or whatever. I don’t care if you’re right-wing, left-wing, authoritarian or libertarian, I think we can all agree that homosexuality is not tied to pedophilia. In any way. I try not to have too polarizing an opinion on these, but if you think there is a tie, then that means oppressors of LGBTQ+ communities got you in their lies, and I don’t mean to be blunt here, but you are incorrect.
I’m not big on conspiracy theories, but I can’t help feeling like those posters were put up by reactionaries taking advantage of the current pedophilia news craze to discredit the gay rights movement. I know it sounds a little paranoid, but that’s genuinely a bigger possibility than the posters being distributed by gay rights groups, again especially if one knew their history.
I will admit it feels nice to air these opinions, especially since in some corners I’m known as this crazed sex pervert looking to write stories about minors because I like it. Personally, I hate interacting with kids. I just was a kid once, and felt like I wanted to portray sex in high school as what it was – nasty, dramatic, complicated, and actually present. I’m also not done with writing about students, not by a long shot. I’m just glad knowing where I live and the rules on the age of consent, I’ll be a lot safer from misinterpretation by Officer Dogood. I’ll talk to you all next week.
5 thoughts on “Pedophilia in the News”
People use “pedophile” a lot when they mean “child molester” and it causes problems for those with the mental disorder. They difference between the two is important and conflating the two makes it difficult to have any real discussion.
LikeLiked by 1 person
You’re right, I 100% agree after hearing that. I’ll definitely be updating my lexicon with that.
According to the law and to psychiatry which equates the two, there is not distinction.
The distinction is that, as BashfulScribe stated, not all pedophiles actually commit child abuse, i.e., they recognize that acting out their desires to impose sex on a child is harmful to the child.
Another distinction is that not all child abuse is perpetrated by pedophiles.
As to homosexuals being specifically associated with pedophilia or child abuse, once again, those communities intersect but there is also intersection with the heterosexual community.
Obviously to any rational person, to condemn all homosexuals as pedophiles is no more reasonable or rational than is it to condemn all heterosexuals as pedophiles merely because there are some who are.
LikeLiked by 1 person
My main issue is that people pay more attention to the ‘intersectionality’ of gay and pedophile and think that has philosophical roots rather than just realizing that just as some pedophiles are straight, some are gay. The idea of someone picturing of gay communities and pedophilic communities intersecting is somewhat of an issue to me because most people see that as the communities validating each other, despite no evidence of gay communities saying that pedophilia is normal and/or natural. At most there’s one whackjob, gay or straight, that decides to proclaim loudly and proudly how pedophilia is ‘totally okay,’ hence the man from Virginia.
I understand and appreciate your frustration at those who take the fact that some pedophiles are homosexual and some homosexuals are pedophiles that necessarily then all homosexuals MUST BE pedophiles.
I think we both understand that such people are irrational. Perhaps the difference between our perspectives it that having lived longer and having no tolerance for those who are irrational, I just accept their stupidity and realize that NOTHING I can do or say is ever going to penetrate their belief system.
A number of years ago I concocted a paraphrased version of the adage: “You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make him drink” which goes like this: “You can lead a man to knowledge but you can’t make him think.”
And that is my perception of the irrational among us; they do not think, they ‘feel’ or they ‘believe’ or both but what they feel or believe does not comport with reality.