Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There is plenty of "truth" being told in this thread - by people who KNOW what they are talking about.
But those who are pre-filled with stereotyping and predjudice refuse to see thru to those truths - and will never recover from their own sickness of hatred.
I agree with you 100%. The point of this debate is not to demonize homosexuals or exonerate heterosexuals ..... the point is to recognize who these demons are, and the best way to do that is by being honest with regard to observations of their behavior that might help identify them.
In my view, there is no doubt about the fact that these creeps who molest little girls are demonstrating a heterosexual orientation insofar as their victim selection is concerned. And if that is true, then it would also be true that heterosexual oriented pedophiles commit more acts of pedophilia based on the raw figures that show more girls are victimized than are boys. By the same measure, the males who molest little boys are demonstrating a homosexual orientation in their selection of victims, regardless of their personal claims of orientation toward adults. It's "self identification" testimony, which is anecdotal evidence, versus direct observation which is empirical evidence.
So is there a reason to make any distinction? As far as how these vile creatures should be dealt with, no, it makes no difference whatsoever. But in identifying them for the purpose of stopping them and preventing further harm to children, yes ... honest assessments, free of political bias or cover is essential in helping to prevent them from causing children harm. It only serves their interests in maintaining their anonymity by embracing false identifiers, such as labeling all of them heterosexual just because they make a claim which doesn't fit the evidence.
I missed this gem earlier.
Please, stop trying to dress up your blatant biases as some sort of crusade for the truth. It's not a crusade for the truth; it's just a crusade. You have no idea how to use information in an academic journal, and even when that is pointed out to you, you just keep on comin'.
I've got a better idea ... let's look at facts. And since you are so touchy about sources and their reputability, I decided to go straight to the most reputable source of all regarding homosexual issues ... The Journal of Homosexuality. You don't have a problem with them do you? They aren't one of those anti-gay groups, are they? Of course they aren't. They are the most pro-gay group you'll find anywhere ... including the glorification of having sex with children ... that thing that YOU CLAIM homosexuals don't do.
These are direct statements from homosexuals, homosexual advocates and psychologists who seem to believe that this whole pedophile thing has been blown out of proportion (no pun intended). BTW, I posted some of this already, which you totally ignored ... surprise surprise.
But I'm tenacious ... and not going to let you off the hook.
The Journal of Homosexuality(1990) produced a special double issue devoted to adult-child sex, which was entitled "Male Intergenerational Intimacy" :
Another writer said a man who counseled troubled teenage boys could achieve "miracles... not by preaching to them, but by sleeping with them."
The loving pedophile can offer a "companionship, security and protection" which neither peers nor parents can provide (p. l62). Parents should look upon the pedophile who loves their son "not as a rival or competitor, not as a thief of their property, but as a partner in the boy's upbringing, someone to be welcomed into their home..." (p. 164).
A British university professor wrote: "Boys want sex with men, boys seduce adult men, the experience is very common and much enjoyed" (p. 323). A professor of social science at the State University of New York says he looks forward to the day when Americans will "get over their hysteria about child abuse" (p. 325) and child pornography.
No doubt this is one of those reputable sources in one of your "studies". Hey ... child molestation ... child pornography ... what's the big deal America, loosen up!
Now the reality is, this one single source ... The Journal of Homosexuality, and the references above even have page numbers. Sorry I can't give you a link, because I'm actually not a subscriber to the fine journal. Nevertheless, it is a wealth of information that makes no bones about the homosexual community's relatively neutral to favorable views toward sex with children, and how this is a good thing!
There are ton's of articles filled with disgusting material from professors to psychologists to homosexual activists all singing the same sickening tune .... a song you have repeatedly claimed doesn't even exist.
I've got lots more, but let's not get carried away with too much volume right now ... let's stay focused.
I want you to RESPOND TO THIS ....because this is calling you a liar ... not I ... the Journal of Homosexuality is calling your claims bald face lies .... not directly of course, because they don't even know you ... but the clear advocacy of homosexual pedophilia is not just acknowledged here ... but glorified and advocated and excused as not harmful .. etc. This directly challenges everything you've stated so far, and I want to know what you have to say about this!
So, here's your chance .... don't run away .. and don't just look the other way.
The summary of the position seems to be that pedophilia is either largely or exclusively committed by heterosexuals, with the obvious inference suggesting no connections exist between child molestation and homosexuals. This post goes on and on with study after study making some of the most outrageous claims and assumptions, and carefully presenting this politically biased nonsense as scientific fact.
So, to set the record straight, I'm going to take the time to address this "shotgun" style, information overload, tactical ploy, one item at a time.
For those who may have missed it ... the claim is ALL research agrees, and challenges me to present some research from "reputable sources". This is a blatant tactical maneuver to automatically disqualify any information that doesn't agree as "not reputable". How convenient.
But as the old saying goes, the devil is in the details. So let's look at some details CAREFULLY ... the above "study" cites the lack of reports of lesbians molesting little girls as some sort of proof that homosexual males don't molest little boys. Of course what lesbians do or don't do has no relevance whatsoever to what homosexual males may or may not do. And this false connection of facts is so obvious! But, aside the false connections of disparate issues, the statement itself isn't true, and the common line that suggests that female pedophiles don't really exist, and that this is a pathology effecting only males, is simply false. Females are estimated to account for between 3-15% of child molestations .... certainly those figures show an 85% male related crime, but not exclusive to males as is claimed. What surprised me was that some studies have shown that the female offenders that really do exist after all, are also more likely to be the most violent offenders too, and molest more individual children than the male pedophile. Bet this is news to most people .. it was to me! I believed that it was only us lousy good for nothing men who molested children, but the nations prisons with female offenders behind bars for these crimes suggest otherwise.
Heather Moulden’s 2007 follow-up to Finkelhor’s research verifies, “despite a social reluctance to acknowledge female sexual abusers, reports suggest that they account for between 3% and 15% of all sexual offences†(387). However, as Richard Tewksbury reports, that number is probably much higher since “female sex offending is […] acknowledged as possibly less likely to be detected or reported†(30). Despite the general reluctance to pursue female suspects and to incarcerate them (Moulden 199), criminal acts by female offenders have reached a ratio of 6:1 compared to male criminal acts (Palmero 30). Moulden’s study of female sex offenders found that “females offended against younger victims and were more violent as compared with male abusersâ€
As shocking a revelation as this is, the moral to the story is "don't believe everything you hear .. or everything ALL OF THE STUDIES prove. The claim that lesbians don't molest little girls is patently false, and can be considered in the same fraudulent light that suggests women in general don't molest children, or that gay men don't, and that the only ones that do are the heterosexual males. It's not true at all.
We cannot possibly be responsible, and here's why. Us heterosexual males are far too busy oppressing women, minorities, homosexuals, and everyone else that are not heterosexual males, driven by our genetically based racist bigotry and homophobia, so we have little spare time to commit ALL of the child molesting too. Surely someone else must be doing a little of it? I know you think we are ALL POWERFUL, but really .. we can't be everything evil to everyone, simultaneously. Even the all powerful can't manage that. But this sure seems to be the overriding theme, repeated over and over and over, so it must be true, right?
Hopefully, most intelligent people won't be deceived by these blatant deceptions coming from the leftists who want people to believe in the wholesome nature of homosexuality, and the curse that is heterosexuality, including the devilish white heterosexual males who are singularly responsible for everything bad that happens on earth.
Ahem. Where to begin with this LAUGHABLE nonsense? Let's start with this business about homosexuals being attracted to each other because of their "masculine qualities" first. What a most absurd claim to make! Preposterous really, given that the majority of homosexual males are anything but the embodiment of "masculine qualities". No offense intended to the gay guys, but lets face reality ... take a good look around ... take your pick ... let's take Elton John or Liberace and tell me how these pinnacles of masculinity drive women wild in Playgirl Magazine with their explosive testosterone eruptions! What a joke. The reality is that most gay men are fairly easy to identify because of their lack of masculine qualities and their obvious feminine aspects. With some exceptions, a gay male can be identified from a mile away, in an instant. The insinuation is absurd ... masculine qualities indeed. That's rich.
But as absurd as that might be, the absurdity is just beginning. So we are also to believe that it's the heterosexual's attraction to feminine qualities that move them to select little boys to molest because they are more feminine in nature. And the suggestion here seems to be that the little boys are more feminine that little girls? What total, inane nonsense. If they are attracted to children, and feminine qualities, the OBVIOUS choice would be to pick FEMALE CHILDREN But you'd have us believe the the exact opposite? I dun thin so lucy
And finally, we have ... "it appears therefore that the adult heterosexual male constitutes a greater sexual risk to underage children than does the adult homosexual male". This really is the epitome of claiming that dogs meow and cats bark. It appears that one must believe a truckload of nonsense first ... then they can believe that.
Of course, the truth is, homosexual males constitute an EXPONENTIAL risk to little boys, and they make no effort to hide these desires ... you just need to cut through this rather blatant BS being served up, and do the some actual thinking, and examining the empirical evidence, rather than these bogus and laughable "Studies from reputable sources", which includes the plethora of references directly from the homosexual community touting the values of sex with children, which is EXCLUSIVELY promoted by homosexuals through gay rights organizations, gay publications etc. Examples? Sure, plenty ... but what you won't find is one single solitary heterosexual group championing the joys of pedophilia ... NOT ONE EXAMPLE.
Here:
Journal of Homosexuality - "Male Inter generational Intimacy," contains several reference articles portraying sex between men and minor boys as loving relationships. One article said "parents should look upon the pedophile who loves their son "not as a rival or competitor, not as a theft of their property, but as a partner in the boy's upbringing, someone to be welcomed into their home."
and
In 1995 the homosexual magazine "Guide" said, "We can be proud that the gay movement has been home to the few voices who have had the courage to say out loud that children are naturally sexual" and "deserve the right to sexual expression with whoever they choose. "
"Instead of fearing being labeled pedophiles, we must proudly proclaim that sex is good, including children's sexuality! We must do it for the children's sake."
and
Larry Kramer, the founder of ACT-UP, wrote in his book, "Report from the Holocaust: The Making of an AIDS Activist": "In those instances where children do have sex with their homosexual elders, be they teachers or anyone else, I submit that often, very often, the child desires the activity, and perhaps even solicits it."
and
A 1988 study called "Archives of Sexual Behavior," some 86 percent of pedophiles described themselves as homosexual or bisexual. Also, the study found, the number of teenage male prostitutes who identify as homosexuals has risen from 10 percent to 60 percent in the past 15 years.
I could go on and on for days and pages of reference material showing the homosexual community's incredibly open promotion of sex with youngsters, and the insatiable appetite that seems almost universal, with Harry Hay and his close relationships with NAMBLA (Wearing a NAMBLA tee shirt at a gay pride march is rather overt, don't you think?) on an on.
Claiming the exact opposite as you have done here is a gross demonstration of pathological lying ... and I must say, you have to be doing it purposely, with your only goal to deceive. No one who has spent any legitimate investigation time could be unaware of all of this.
The "commonest" remarks? And I suppose, once again that little girls must be very hairy and their bodies hard and rough compared to the soft little boys? Sorry, but dogs don't meow, and you shouldn't try to convince anyone that they do ... it just makes you look foolish.
By the way, speaking of foolish ... I bolded the foolishness above ..."H.E. Butt" just to illustrate what an idiot might miss. Good God .... Sexual Offenders, by H.E. Butt ? You just can't make this crap up ... but apparently someone can Is that anything like The Art of Urology by I.P. Daily ?
Perfect use of diversion and deception. What the above actually says is that people who are not pedophiles are not attracted to children. DUH! Unbelievable. People get paid for this? Who knew? What's the next big discovery for this crack team of researchers? People who are attracted to children might be pedophiles? Freaking geniuses these guys.
What is really happening here is YOU are cramming your post with such a high volume of nonsense .. you're throwing everything at the wall, hoping something will stick. It's a common tactic ... if you have nothing to say that makes good sense, just talk as much as you can without saying anything. That's what's happening here.
No identification of the "Child's" gender here. Another blatant deception. The facts are, there are slightly more little girls molested than are little boys in total numbers. The majority (not all) offenders being male, the natural conclusion is that these pedophiles who molest little girls are heterosexual, and that their orientation is demonstrated by their selecting little girls. So it would be accurate to say that heterosexual pedophiles do represent a greater danger to children overall, given the greater number of girls molested. HOWEVER ....breaking it down by gender of the child, and the demographics of male heterosexuals versus male homosexuals which is about 44 to 1 ...the number of little boys molested show as much as 40 times the incidence rate of homosexuals molesting little boys, compared to heterosexuals molesting little girls .... if heterosexual/homosexual orientation is observed by pedophiles in the selection of their victims.
THIS is why there is such a strenuous effort being made here to inanely label all pedophiles as most likely heterosexuals. It's pure crap, and it doesn't take Sherlock Holmes to discover what is going on here.
And if you don't believe it the first, second or third time, we're going to say it again ... gay men are good baby sitters ... especially for the little boys! (wink, wink, nudge, nudge).
Deny deny. That's the repeating theme.
Oh that's great evidence. They self identify as heterosexuals? Let's get something straight .... ALL of the claims of pedophiles being heterosexuals come from leftist homosexual advocates who selectively pick these pedophiles in denial as their evidence. Even the ones who admit to having homosexual contact with other adults as well as the children make this claim! Imagine that. Yes, we need to just ignore the overt homosexual nature of male adults molesting male children, and take their word for it that this is what heterosexuals do?
Ah ... here we go ... over and over again ... pedophiles are mostly heterosexual ... pedophiles are ALL heterosexual ... heterosexuals are 97% blah, blah, blah .... heterosexuals are 100 times more , blah blah blah .... and then THIS ... "A gay man is no more likely than a straight man to perpetrate sexual activity with children". No more likely? Isn't that the same thing as saying "Just as Likely"?
Gay men and straight men do have different brains. Gay men are wired a bit more like straight women than straight men. Gay men are not generally attracted to children, because children do no possess masculine qualities. Boys and girls both possess feminine, soft, hairless features that make them attractive to heterosexuals.
That actually makes sense, just like men and women have different brains. Then, the Lesbian brain, would most likely be like that of a Straight male
The only example that I know of up close and personal of an attempted molestation of a male on child male was my cousin when he was 15 and the perpetrator was gay. While my cousin wasn't a small hairless child the guy was a family friend and he knew my cousin was under age.
That actually makes sense, just like men and women have different brains. Then, the Lesbian brain, would most likely be like that of a Straight male
Yes.
Quote:
The only example that I know of up close and personal of an attempted molestation of a male on child male was my cousin when he was 15 and the perpetrator was gay. While my cousin wasn't a small hairless child the guy was a family friend and he knew my cousin was under age.
More like a crime of opportunity. Although, 15 is the legal age of consent in some states (like the South), so it's not pedophilia. If anything it's ephebophilia.
Of course a good amount of pedophilia is committed by Homosexuals! Good grief, is it now Un "PC" to admit the facts? My "close as a brother" best friend, a gay guy told me back when we were in our twenties, among a ton of things that he preferred males but not any with facial hair.
I didn't think much about it but then watched him in the company of a 11 or 12yr. old boy from our neighborhood, and how my friend couldn't help himself from walking almost excitedly, very fast behind the kid when he got to show him his new car. It was not normal, it was so sad to witness an otherwise very, fabulous "soul of a guy" act in a way that he was unaware of himself.
Tigerlily, I believe you are totally mistakened about the OP's intent. He's setting the record straight in a world gone mad, where truth is hidden, and denied, and those that dare to speak it amidst this insane, political climate are ostracized, to say the least.
A world gone mad it is....exactly right. And is it any wonder that we seem to have more and more of these horror stories in a world with reality turned on its head?
It is scarcely believable that so many have surrendered to the repression of the times we live in.
I have been a poster on CD forum for several years....and got to admit this has to be the most repulsive thread I have ever read.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
But you'd have us believe the the exact opposite? I dun thin so lucy
Is that anything like The Art of Urology by I.P. Daily ? 
This will make you sick......
