Here's an old post that, regrettably, remains quite topical to this day.

From: Joseph B. Dunphy <nospam@here.com>
Subject: Re: Troll seeks 12 or 13 yo for j/o party
Date: 11 Apr 1998 00:00:00 GMT
Message-ID: <4.11.98.1.3@silicon.cybertalk.com>


References: <199804032136.XAA06179@basement.replay.com>
<352569C7.6EFAA352@mci.com> <Er3uC4.B4y@world.std.com>
<Cherry1get2lost3$45678@silicon.cybertalk.com>
<Er80qB.8px@world.std.com> <6gmtuc$gtm$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>


Followup-To: alt.recovery.nettalk
Organization: The Halls of Eternal Disbelief
Reply-To: no@thankyou.com
Newsgroups: talk.rape

Summary: If Fred Cherry tells us that the sun rises in the
East, should we seek it in the West?



So, you're falcor. I was wondering who Cherry was ranting about.
In alt.censorship falcor14@ix.netcom.com wrote:


> But Fred Cherry Pitt's just another self-centered caustic bastard.

That's true.


> > Doesn't NAMBLA want ALL homosexuals to be pederasts?

> NAMBLA does not encourage anyone to be sexually
> attracted to anyone. We merely call out for the
> individual rights of boys and men to have caring,
> loving and enthusiastic sexual relationships.

The problem is that the notion of a child's free choice is a slippery one. The child's emotions are still forming. He's still discovering what it is that he does want, and he doesn't have the base of experience and remembered observations to have any clear idea of how he will feel after he has done or experienced something, or what its impact will be on his life. Worse still, his emotions may be easily manipulated and he is easy prey for adults. It is often difficult, as a child, to say no to adults, especially when they pretend to care and even more so when it has become trendy to take what one has been saying at face value. For these reasons and others, we introduce freedoms to the child gradually, bit by bit, as he demonstrates the maturity needed to make them in a fashion that he will be happy about, years down the road.

I remember the daughters of an old girlfriend of mine. As their temporary stepfather, I knew that I could not trust the girls to make their own dinner choices. Not unless I wanted Katie to be living on a steady diet of ice cream. And yet, some would have me believe that she was mature enough to decide for herself whether or not she wished to be intimate with someone. Nobody that I would allow near her, let me assure you, but there were a few online. It is amazing how quickly people will forget their own life experience and fundamental common sense when political issues are discussed. What was once recognised to be a sign of youthful immaturity is now argued to be academic rigor - a rejection of "anecdotal evidence".

Would you seriously expect us to believe that young boys are so much more mature than young girls?


> That said, I wouldn't mind having some of our
> detractors wake up tomorrow with a sincere and innate
> attraction to boys so that they might know how it feels
> to be this country's most popular scapegoat. But no,

I would never condemn someone for his drives, no matter how perverse. Those who have such drives - and struggle with them - have my deepest sympathy and support. They did not ask for their personal demons. But those who yield to them for the sake of their own personal satisfaction have earned nothing but our scorn and the consequences of their criminal acts.


> most homosexuals don't have what it takes to care for
> youth. Youth ARE special. It takes incredible
> patience and unselfish sensitivity to stick with
> someone throughout the crests of adolescence. Most bar-

Does it take "incredible patience and unselfish sensitivity" to have a one night stand? Pedophiles of all orientations have become notorious for just that.


> > Shouldn't parents decide when their child is ready to be
> > sexual?
Yes, so long as the child hasn't reached adulthood.


> When has a parent EVER decided that? The question is,
Mine did, and more power to them. They watched out for me until I was mature enough to watch out for myself. That's what a good parent does.

So have a good many parents, and I'm not alone in my appreciation.


> how much secrecy and rebellion should a kid have to
> foment before finally denying any other person's
> supposed authority over his body? NAMBLA believes

Hmm. You seem to imagine that all (or maybe merely most) children, confronted with parental strictures, sneak around, waiting for the first opportunity to violate them, the moment that the parents aren't watching. Some would suspect that you, yourself must have been such a child, and are projecting your own predilections and experiences on all children, not bothering to take the time to discover just how unusual they are.

Many children obey their parents out of respect or a sense of obligation. They have come to understand that the parents know more than they do, right now, and are acting out of love for the child, as opposed to the desire to get something from the child. A child instinctively sees his parents as a shield standing between him and an untrustworthy world. Many parents see fit to live up to that expectation.

Some obey out of fear of being caught. Childhood is rarely a time of strength, and fear weighs on a child in a way that it is sometimes too easy to forget. It comes from the knowledge that one can't provide for oneself and the feeling of vulnerability, of defenselessness. If the parent is just, this fear may save a child, who will be just sure that he is going to be caught. If the parent, himself, is a predator, and we give him free reign, this very feeling of vulnerability in this very unequal power relationship between those of vastly differing psychological strengths may undermine the child's ability to say no.

A feeling, incidentally, that those who prey on the very young often exploit, seeking those who feel neglected. They will play at being a surrogate parental figure before coaxing them in doing what the adult wants. To prey on someone's emotional vulnerabilities in this fashion is one of the lowest acts that a human being is capable of. One can only hope that the child will encounter a genuinely caring adult before he encounters one of these.


> everyone should have this right from the get-go. We
> will ALL be much safer and happier when there are no
> more dirty secrets or law-enforced ignorance under the
> guise of "protection."

Ignorance is that which all are born with. It takes time to acquire understanding. Time is the one thing that a child hasn't had - yet.


> Do you let YOUR parents choose your lovers? Or, not
> any more, but you did when you were 12? What? You

You take a great deal for granted, as you allow yourself to play the role of the reader in this imaginary conversation. I have asked Cherry to refrain from putting words in the mouths of others. I would ask you to do the same, even if the context is different.


> mean you NEVER asked your parents about who you should
> have sex with? But when it comes to boys and men

When it comes to boys and men, the just restrictions that we have put upon heterosexuals should not be set aside. But there will always be opportunists, such as yourself, who will scream "persecution" when they are held to the same standards as everyone else. Like you, they offer a distorted picture of reality in order to make it appear otherwise.

I'm not your friend, falcor. I'm ashamed to say that I considered letting your post pass without comment, because I didn't want the hassle. Well, I don't. But Cherry is right about one thing. You are a predator and a prime example of so much that is wrong with our country, now. The self absorption. The willingness to view the impaired judgement of others, not as a reason to watch out for them, but rather as an opportunity to advance one's own desires and interests by taking advantage of them, daring to pretend this exploitation of another's moment of weakness is an expression of respect for one's victim. The attitude that one is being oppressed, if one ever has to hear the word "no".

You and Cherry have that last one in common.

Our society is in one of those eras in which a nation decides what it is going to be about. There are some among us who would make it into a latter day version of the Roman Empire, where the weak are trampled and violated at every opportunity, and the powerful cravenly and yet cheerfully submitted to. Every time that one of us looks away as another becomes a victim, we move another step closer to making that future a reality. It is the duty of each of us to do otherwise.

I don't want to hear from you again, falcor. You are as deluded as Fred, if you think that the actions taken against him serve as a vindication of your goals. I respect your right to argue your position. I simply don't respect you.