Wearing the mask
Reduxx has further detail on the Jacob Breslow question – Jacob Breslow Associate Professor at the London School of Economics, that is.
The academic who recently resigned from a charity that promotes the medical transitioning of children had for years been writing blog entries related to pro-pedophilia activism and “minor attraction.”
Activism around sex with children, that is.
“Activism” forsooth – as if the common understanding that it’s extremely wrong to force sex on children were just another outdated unexamined prejudice like the one that says women are stupid and inferior or the one that says non-white people are stupid and inferior.
It’s not. Sex is not good for children. Adults forcing or coaxing or tricking them into sex is destructive and loathsome. It’s like a clip I saw yesterday that froze me in horror and pity –
It seems pretty simple. Don’t treat children that way.
In 2011, Breslow, then a PhD student, spoke at a symposium titled “Pedophilia, Minor-Attracted Persons, and the DSM: Issues and Controversies,” hosted by pedophile advocacy organization B4U-Act. The stated purpose of the symposium was to lobby the American Psychiatric Association for changes to the diagnostic definition of pedophilia in order to “reduce stigma” against “minor-attracted people” (MAPs).
So that those people could rape children with impunity. That’s Associate Professor Breslow.
Founded in 2009 by convicted child rapist Michael Melsheimer, B4U-Act had apparently been approved by the founders of infamous pederast activist group, the North American Man/Boy Love Association (NAMBLA). After B4U-Act’s creation, Melsheimer had informed other pedophiles that his organization’s approach would be focused around garnering public support for normalizing pedophilia by falsely claiming the intention was to prevent child sexual abuse.
When in fact the goal was to prevent the prevention of child sexual abuse.
At their symposium, Breslow read from a paper in which he rejected the understanding of pedophilic attraction to children as being inherently harmful, and supported the concept of pedophilia being classified as a sexual or political orientation.
By the same token it’s not inherently harmful for adults to put on terror-masks and scream in the faces of sobbing screaming shaking toddlers.
“Allowing for a form of non-diagnosable minor attraction is exciting, as it potentially creates a sexual or political identity by which activists, scholars, and clinicians can begin to better understand Minor Attracted Persons”…read Breslow’s abstract.
Oh joy, an idenniny – an idenniny for the raping adult, that is, not for the sobbing screaming shaking child. We can better understand adults who rape children! As for the children they rape, well they obviously don’t need to be better understood, the little sluts.
Following news of Breslow’s pedophilia apologism, further damning revelations have come to light, with a feminist Twitter user exposing WordPress blog entries written by Breslow from 2009 to 2017. Twitter user @Scottish_Woman first drew attention to the old blog, providing evidence that Breslow’s sordid history with pedophile sympathizing was far longer than previously thought.
Many entries by Breslow advocate for reframing pedophilia as a sexual identity comparable to homosexuality.
But of course it’s not comparable. Molesting children is not a sexual identity, it’s a crime against children.
A new question arises: Why did a guy who seemingly wanted to diddle kids join an organization that wanted to mutilate them? Perhaps the idea of puberty blockers and 16-year olds with delayed development turned him on?
Well I think it’s because it’s all part of the Queer Everything project. Queer sex, queer gender, queer childhood, queer adulthood, queer boundaries, queer safeguarding, queer consent, queer refusal, queer “No.”
I’d say it’s because sexuality is inextricable from the transgender package. A transgender person is a sexual being, and so a transgender child is a sexual child. Narcissistic AGPs use the concept of the trans kid to validate their own fantasies by making their fetish an intrinsic, unalterable character trait. Pedophiles, on the other hand, use the sexuality of rainbow subculture to sexualize children.
Pedophiles get their jollies from this even if they never once meet a trans kid. They get vicarious thrills by setting up children to be abused, as well as the thrill of being in control of a child’s sexual life, after the fashion of a pimp. They get to hear trans kids talking about sexual things and even get to talk with them about sexual things in public. They get to sexualize children in public. And the fact that there’s not a goddamn thing most people can do about it without being labeled some sort of -ist or -phobe gives a rush of power.
Why wouldn’t a pedophile support transing kids?
And seriously, anyone who falls for the idea that destigmatizing pedophilia would help in any way to reduce instances of child abuse needs to be slapped. Pedophilia doesn’t bear a stigma randomly and spontaneously. We revile pedophilia because it’s the emotional component to something we revile: sexual activity with children. Someone who has the desire or urge to do something is, all else being equal, more likely to do that thing than someone without that desire or urge. Obviously. So we stigmatize that mental state in the interest of child safety. And that’s assuming we restrict pedophilia to meaning only the sexual attraction to or desire for children, which isn’t actually the case. Like with so many of these Critical Theory-derived rhetorics, the strategy is to temporarily deny a meaning, then forget that denial when advantageous. In this case, they deny that pedophilia refers to sexual activity with children, as though the words “engage in” never appear in front of “pedophilia”, “necrophilia”, and the like.
Hrm, there’s a typo or too* in there.
* ba dum tiss
Ophelia & Nullius in Verba,
I was a little discomfited from having found that rabbit hole – Thanks for helping me hear sane people attempt to explain its existence.
I don’t have kids, and am not that fond of kids, and I found that video difficult to watch–I find it hard to believe people whose actual job is to care for and teach children could be comfortable witnessing what these kids were going through.
I don’t have kids either, but I’ve been a kid, and I’ve looked after kids, and those screams and sobs just about did me in, as did the little girl whose hands jerked in terror when the daycare worker came close to her.
I had a few minutes of terror like that once as a small child. It was at an afternoon Halloween party or gathering, and people were on a back porch facing a long back yard with a fence at the bottom. I was looking down the yard for some reason and saw the gate open and a witch come in. No one else noticed, and I just stood there frozen in terror watching the witch approach.
Afterwards I felt very silly for being fooled, but hey, I was a small child.
It was a horrible feeling. I wouldn’t wish it on any children.
Nullius in Verba: Good point.
To use an analogy: destigmatizing pyromania is unlikely to reduce the instances of mental illness-inspired arson.
Where did the the whole idea of the medical transitioning of minors come from? Who came up with the ideas of the “transgender child” and the “transgender teenager”?
There had been “transsexual/transgender” individuals in the public eye for decades, such as Christine Jorgensen and April Ashley. But such individuals had always medically and surgically transitioned as *adults*. Whatever they may have felt as minors, they always waited until adulthood to undertake this process.
This 2005 article in the New York Times seems to be the first time the paper mentions the term “transgender teenager”:
https://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/13/us/two-guilty-of-murder-in-death-of-a-transgender-teenager.html?searchResultPosition=1
And this 2006 letter to the same publication seems to be the first time the paper mentions the term “transgender child”:
https://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/07/opinion/l07gender.html?searchResultPosition=1
[…] a comment by Nullius in Verba replying to the question “Why did a guy who seemingly wanted to diddle […]