Child porn and pedophilia to be legal soon, by Pandora Pushkin (Not satire)
In which Pandora Pushkin discusses the latest push to legalize pedophilia and make it a trendy new “alternative lifestyle”.
ALICE: Help! I’ve just been raped by Jimmy Savile disguised as the Mad Hatter!
MAD QUEEN: Too many complaints—off with her head!
If Jimmy Savile had lived a few more years—say ten at the most—he could have found himself living in a world in which pedophilia was legal. Instead of being vilified for his creepy sexual activities, Jimmy could have found himself a national hero.
Resorting to the same tactics used by gay rights activists, pedophiles have begun to seek a similar legal status, arguing that their sexual desire for children is just a natural “sexual orientation”. If homosexuals like going to bed with their own sex and that’s okay, why is it so wrong if a 70-year-old man wants to go to bed with a 7-year-old girl?
“If a guy offers the kid candy and she consents to sex, what’s the big deal?” it’s now being asked. It’s not like he’s forcing her, is it? Shouldn’t the child have a choice to say Yes or No?
Critics of the homosexual lifestyle have long claimed that once it became acceptable to identify homosexuality as simply an “alternative lifestyle” or sexual orientation, logically nothing would be off limits. Gay advocates have taken offense at such a position, insisting this would never happen.
Well, it’s happened.
Pedophiles are using exactly the same brand of logic as homosexuals once used to get their preferred form of sex legalized. Sodomy is just an alternative lifestyle. Gay sex is cool. Sure, we all know that. Like the world is round, gay sex is cool. Nothing wrong with gay sex. Gays are made like that. They can’t help it.
It follows from this argument that if a guy in his seventies fancies a 7-year-old girl, or boy, there’s nothing wrong with that, either. Heck, that’s how he’s made! It’s his sexual orientation. And what harm is he doing if the 7-year-old girl (or boy) doesn’t mind being specially nice to him for a little extra pocket money?
Calling him a “dirty old man” is sooo wrong! It shouldn’t be allowed. That’s hate speech, like calling someone a “kike” or “nigger”.
Come to think of it, what’s so wrong if this same guy is into corpses, like Jimmy Savile is reported to have been? Corpses can’t say “No”. So there’s no question about getting cadaveral consent.
Let’s consider necrophilia for a moment. This is not off-topic. It’s highly relevant.
I guess it’s possible to argue that sex with corpses can also be pretty cool and awesome. Like it’s just an alternative lifestyle. I mean, if you happen to be born with a natural sexual orientation for sex with the dead, maybe society should be a bit more tolerant and not start making moral judgments.
Maybe necrophiliacs ought to put in for protected minority status, just like pedophiles and homosexuals…?
I guess one way to settle this vexed question about necrophilia, if it’s right or wrong, is to ask yourself: if YOU were a corpse, how would you like someone to make use of your dead body for sexual purposes? It can easily be argued that most people are not going to mind, for no other reason than this: they’re going to be dead! How can you mind if you’re dead? When you’re dead, what do you care? If you don’t mind being burned to ashes or put six feet under, why should you mind being used as a sex object that gives pleasure to a necrophiliac?
Thus the smooth casuist will be able to argue.
I foresee certain problems of course with legalized necrophilia, but I am sure these can be overcome easily enough with advertizing campaigns on TV assuring the public that sex with corpses is just fine and dandy — just like killing innocent people in Iraq and Afghanistan and Palestine is fine and dandy, if you can con people into thinking these people are very wicked.
I mean, if torture is okay — and torture IS perfectly legal in America and Israel — there’s absolutely no reason why necrophilia (or pedophilia with dead children) shouldn’t be legal too, is there?
I can understand that the relatives of the corpse might get a bit upset. That’s to be expected. Relatives can be like that. Uncooperative. But the responsible necrophiliac is never going to misbehave with a corpse, is he? If he’s got any self-respect, he’s going to check it out with the deceased’s relatives first. To ask if they mind. To get their compassionate consent.
“I’m dead and in the cooler
But I wanna come back
As a serial killer
Or a necrophiliac.”
— Anon, Kinky Graffiti
Psychiatrists are now beginning to advocate redefining pedophilia in the same way homosexuality was redefined several years ago.
In 1973 the American Psychiatric Association declassified homosexuality from its list of mental disorders. A group of psychiatrists recently held a symposium proposing a new definition of pedophilia in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Health Disorders of the APA.
They decided that pedophiles were to be called “minor-attracted people” from now on. “Pedophile” was thought to be too harsh a word. It had negative connotations. So a clear attempt is now being made to “prettify” pedophilia and make it not only socially acceptable but a harmless and trendy “alternative lifestyle.”
Just like homosexuality.
The idea is this: if people can be brainwashed into thinking homosexuality is nice and normal, why can’t they be brainwashed into thinking pedophilia is nice and normal too?
In ten years time, it is hoped, the public will be ready for the legalization of pedophilia. In the meantime, they need to be softened up. The stigma attached to pedophilia needs to be removed. Not only this, but the same stigma will need to be subtly transferred to those who oppose pedophilia and feel pedophilia is morally wrong and repugnant. These child protectors will need to be portrayed as desperately out-of-touch cranks, as reactionary crackpots hostile to the child’s right to free sexual expression.
Will a new word of abuse and contempt, like “homophobe” and “anti-Semite”, have to be invented for the nasty people who disapprove of pedophilia? I don’t think so. There’s already a word that will do beautifully: PEDOPHOBE.
Loosely translated, this means “child hater”. By extension, it also means “pedophile hater”. The word can be applied to anyone who opposes pedophilia and thinks it is disgusting.
The word “pedophobe”, in other words, will soon be applied as a term of abuse to anyone who opposes pedophilia. If you don’t like pedophila, you will soon find yourself labeled a “pedophobe” — an object of disgust and contempt which will put you into the same category as a “homophobe” or “anti-Semite”.
As far back as 1998, the APA issued a report claiming that “the negative potential of adult sex with children was ‘overstated’ and that the vast majority of both men and women reported no negative sexual effects from childhood sexual abuse experiences.”
Only earlier this year two psychologists in Canada declared that pedophilia was a sexual orientation just like homosexuality. So there was nothing to worry about. It ought to be accepted.
Mr Van Gijseghem, psychologist and retired professor of the University of Montreal, told members of Parliament, “Pedophiles are not simply people who commit a small offense from time to time but rather are grappling with what is equivalent to a sexual orientation just like another individual may be grappling with homosexuality.”
Dr. Quinsey, professor emeritus of psychology at Queen’s University in Kingston, Ontario, agreed with Van Gijseghem. Quinsey said that pedophiles have a definite sexual preference for children. “There is no evidence that this sort of preference can be changed through treatment or through anything else,” he said. (See here)
In July, 2010, Harvard Health Publications chipped in and gave pedophilia another boost. “Pedophilia is a sexual orientation and is unlikely to change,” they said. Harvard is now 25 percent Jewish, and the most influential part too, so one can expect a trendy contempt for Christian values to emanate from this ivory tower. Indeed, it was only last week that a sex bondage club, catering for student sadists and masochists, was set up at this august university. (See here and here)
Linda Harvey, of Mission America, said the push for pedophiles to have equal rights will become more and more common as LGBT [Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender] groups continue to assert themselves. “It’s all part of a plan to introduce sex to children at younger and younger ages.” (See here)
It’s only a matter of time before Harvard university and its Ivy League imitators begin to set up student clubs for pedophiles and child porn enthusiasts, provided they can first give the whole enterprise a veneer of academic respectability—which of course they will be able to do, given all that Jewish talent at their disposal.
Children like this are being deliberately groomed for pedophilia. Toxic hormones are being surreptitiously introduced into junk foods, soft drinks, and the water supply so as to produce early puberty and sexual precocity on an epidemic scale.
Milton Diamond, a University of Hawaii professor and director of the Pacific Center for Sex and Society, stated that child pornography could be beneficial to society because, “Potential sex offenders use child pornography as a substitute for sex against children.”
I am not surprised that a man with a name like “Milton Diamond” should put in a good word for child pornography. We know what ethnic group benefits most from the promotion of pornography. And Milton Diamond obviously belongs to this elite group of cultural Marxists who would like to see the entire world take up compulsive masturbation as a hobby.
Dr Diamond is a distinguished lecturer for the Institute for the Advanced Study of Human Sexuality in San Francisco. The same institute lists, on its website, a list of “basic sexual rights” that include “the right to engage in sexual acts or activities of any kind whatsoever, providing they do not involve nonconsensual acts, violence, constraint, coercion or fraud.” Another thing they praise is “the freedom of any sexual thought, fantasy or desire.” The Institute also states, significantly, that “no one should be disadvantaged because of age.”
Dr Diamond makes it crystal clear what kind of brave new world he would like to see us all living in. It is reassuring to know that no one will be left behind — that “no one should be disadvantaged because of age.”
Dr Diamond sees the protection now extended to toddlers as a “disadvantage”. Why are these adorable little creatures, full of life’s promise, being denied the pleasures of sexual intercourse with wise old coots ten times their senior?
Just think what a 7-year-old child could learn from entering into intimate relations with a 70-year-old senior citizen! To deprive the child of the benefits of his superior wisdom is positively cruel!
Penis size will of course have to be taken into account, and men with exceptionally large penises will obviously have to be disqualified from intercourse with toddlers. Or maybe they can be encouraged to use vaseline and special lubricants which will help to anaesthetize the three sexual orifices likely to be utilized.
In any case, it’s early days. Not to worry. The experts will work it all out. Leave it to the boffins.
Here’s more good news for you if you happen to be a pedophile: Dr Diamond says he would like to legalize child porn so that you can enjoy the innocent pleasure of masturbating over children. Isn’t that kind of him? He thinks this will stop you raping and killing children.
Gosh, why didn’t someone think of this before? For more information on this fascinating topic, click on:
Sex offender laws protecting children have been challenged in several states including California, Georgia and Iowa. Sex offenders claim that the laws prohibiting them from living near schools or parks, for example, are unfair because it penalizes them for life.
Let’s face it, friends: perversion is cool. I mean, anything can be perceived as cool — even eating shit. If you’re born a perv, you need respect and understanding from the community. You need special facilities laid on for you so that you can indulge your perversion as a human right.
Child porn is just a stepping stone toward even greater liberties. Child brothels, regulated by the state, will obviously be the next step on the Noble Eightfold Path. Even cannibalism and murder, provided you get the written consent of your victim, ought not to be ruled out.
As they say in New Zion or USreal, every option should be kept on the table.
This is the way the word ends…not with a bang but a whimper…as one pushes beyond the borderlines of the banal in the ultimate quest for mystical union with the divine — or diabolical.
Beautiful 6-year-old Jersey Bridgeman, from Arkansas, was found raped and murdered last week a few doors from her mother’s home. She is here seen wearing LIPSTICK. Why has this child been so needlessly sexualized and made to look more like an adult? If her mother hadn’t bought her that lipstick, would she still be alive today? (See here)
Is this little girl “asking” for it?
Is she being groomed for pedophilia?
If you have time to watch this 10-minute video
about the sexualization of young children,