Evil-unveiled.com/The Persecution Delusion

The Persecution Delusion
Purpose:	To garner sympathy from minority groups
Website Address:
Affiliations:
Synopsis:
	Pedophiles have long compared themselves and their "plight" with minority groups which involve no criminal behavior.

Warning: This article contains especially disturbing subject matter. Reader discretion is advised.

There is a delusion that pedophiles are under which is insane at the very best. They claim they are "persecuted" and "oppressed," the same way blacks, gays, Jews and women have been maltreated over the centuries. They would like to ride on the margins of these other minorities in order to garner sympathy from those minorities, and to use the history of the emancipation of these minorities as precedence for their own freedom to have sex with children.

They forget one thing: Pedophiles are seen with disdain and disgust, not because they are different, but because they cause harm to other human beings. This behavior can only be described with quotes and sources, below.

Comparing Pedophiles to Gay People

Scratch the average homosexual and you will find a pedophile.

Kevin Bishop

Article 1: Discrimination

As amaros is not illegal of itself, and is a distinct and unchosen sexual orientation,7 it is unreasonable that amarsi — ephebophiles, pedophiles and teleiophiles — should be subject to any form of discrimination. To this end, amarsi have the same right to legal protection against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation as do people with any other sexual orientation.

I tried to keep them be lit but it was windy tonight, so I put some big old glass jars over them with sticks of wood under them for air, and I also had left Scuffy Lad's Xmas pic papers with them saying: "IBLD - STOP the hate/hysteria against innocent and benign, true loving and consentual (gay/straight) boylovers, and their beloved boys. - Remember Matthew Shepard!"

No, I think it's a symbolical standpoint. You don't have to agree with NAMBLA on everything, I don't do that myself and Destroyer hasn't taken a position on the age-of-consent issue. What I criticize is that the gay movement has chosen a strategy that aims to show an inoffensive image of LGBT people, instead of demanding acceptance for the deviating, whatever it looks like as long as it's legal. The condemnation of NAMBLA has nothing to do with caring about the children, but about suppressing the most extreme expression of homosexuality. Promiscuous gay men and visible lesbians have been suppressed on the same grounds, and I call that shame.

On Oct 4, Epifora was notified by MCI Canada that its connection to the internet backbone would be cut off in 30 days for violating the "acceptable use policy" of Verizon--the giant US telecom that swallowed MCI in 2005. By Nov 3, Epifora's edgy queer websites were offline. An American corporation had effectively skirted Canadian law to censor Canadian websites.

Gay culture does not grant the pedophile movement general acceptance. It does, however, offer a peripheral credibility to this movement which pedophilia has never been granted in the culture at large. Members of NAMBLA (The North American Man-Boy Love Association) march in some gay pride parades.

NOTE: NAMBLA is no longer welcome at gay events, and are usually shunned if they show up.

Discrimination Against a Minority

The vast majority of the articles in "Male Intergenerational Intimacy" argue that pedophilia should be freed from categorization as child abuse. In the foreword, Dr. Gunter Schmidt closes by saying that "Each individual case must be looked upon on its own merits...the threat to make all pedophile acts punishable by law can barely be labeled civilized...it implies discrimination and persecution of a minority and should be abolished." (p. 4)

The author concludes that the feeling of being "born a pedophile" makes them feel they cannot change, and therefore they are convinced they have the same right as other people to pursue the "natural" expression of their sexuality. (p. 133). The same author quotes a respondent's belief that "if adult-child sex was commonplace, the majority of it would surely be good for both participants." (p. 137).

It's hard to evaluate as I'm not familiar with what 'disorder' entails. Pedophilia is certainly an abberration, abnormal,unusual, and does cause some disease in that it isn't exactly a comfortable thing to consider yourself in today's society.

Things like disorder are weird in that it is not inherantly disorder, but does conflict with the common order of things today. While some would use the word 'perversion', that implies that there is a set way for things to be. I would actually say homosexuality is more of a perversion than pedophilia, as traditionally youthful partners are sought out. Of late humans have differed in that, so you could call it a perversion of civilized human attraction, but not biological human attraction.

It can also be a perversion of the biological sense if you take the approach the attraction were to stem from a more chaste sort of care-provider relation which was warped or twisted to become romantic (warping and twisting are words with negative connotations, but I'll use them so we can rid them of it) rather than the raw biological mating urge mammals have which I don't feel fully describes what this entails (though everyone has their moments).

Comparing Pedophiles to Jews

What red blooded American would stick up for a sex offender? And, what Arian blooded Nazi would stick up for a Jew? If you think there is a difference, then think again.

--Joseph Duncan III

Antis ARE the 'New Nazis' CLs are the "New Jews"

Posted by RavenSA on 2007-June-27 10:53:11, Wednesday

In reply to Do these anti-ped activists consider themselves posted by Komerat on 2007-June-27 08:05:10, Wednesday

I've been saying this in real life and under assumed identities for well over 5 years, back before the "antis" were called antis.

I think it is an inevitable fact that as pedophiles are more and more persecuted we will fit better and better into the mold of the persecuted minority, more and more into the shoes of suffering that have been filled by others in our position: Jews, Blacks, etc. And as the antis adopt more and more radical tactics against us they will fit better and better into the shoes of persecutor, of which the Nazi is the prime example.

At what point will this terrorism against us cease? I'm not sure, but already our legacy has already been written, we can read it in the history books by simply inserting Pedophile for Jew.

Fortunately, it's worse than you think.

Posted by Dylan Thomas on 2007-May-20 04:29:34, Sunday

In reply to Boylovers and the Final Solution posted by Curtis on 2007-May-19 23:17:37, Saturday

You write, "One wants to say, 'No, no, it's not that bad.' And it isn't-- yet." But I will maintain now that it really is that bad--and, in fact, worse; I think you're significantly underestimating the scope of the problem. Not because of a flaw in your analysis--I don't think I've ever found an actual flaw in your analyses--but instead because of a frame error that surrounds your analysis.

The first decade of the twenty-first century isn't the 1930s. That may seem like an obvious thing to say, but it has several not-so-obvious consequences. One of which is that the accouterments necessary to execute a systematic extermination of a subpopulation in the 30s are significantly different now. We might say, "It's not as bad yet because we still don't have concentration camps... or gas chambers... or yellow stars..." but that would be wrong. We do have all of those things. We just don't call them by those names.

Aside from the actual number of murders to which The Holocaust aspired, I don't think one can name any element of Nazi extermination of the Jews that is not already present in our current situation. The reason concentration camps haven't been explicitly built is because they're merely being piggybacked on a pre-existing penal and mental health system. The reason why gold stars aren't necessary is because modern technology allows a different type of identity branding. It wasn't possible for Hitler's Nazis to simply glance at a computer connected to the main database and know instantly if the person in front of them was Jew; today, that is possible with sex offenders: the actual physical badge isn't necessary. And the reason why six million murders haven't happened is precisely because The Holocaust already happened. People instinctively know better, in the post-modern world, than to invite comparison by repeating history so overtly. We must make a show of living in more enlightened times, so instead of gas chambers and ovens, we have instead Death Lite: a permanent removal from the world of interpersonal influence.

Unlike Jews, we don't have to be killed to be eliminated; we can be eliminated by various other means including permanent incarceration, permanent labeling (thus eliminated from the job market, the housing market, the political arena, and of course parenting; like Ralph Ellison's invisible man, the inability to leave a mark is in itself a form of death, a subsociety of walking ghosts) and the far more insidious self-elimination through the obvious suicide and the less-obvious therapy, behavior modification, self-imposed isolation and lifelong secrecy.

So don't ask yourself, "How many boylovers have been murdered like the Jews were murdered?" That's asking a 30s question in a 00s world. Instead, ask your self, "How many boylovers have ceased to exist in a way which would enable them to be boylovers?" Have people like our own hyacinth--who reminds us that he has no boys in his life and never will--already, in fact, been through the gas chamber? Yes, I concede, the fact we're not actually dead means that the tragedy is nowhere near comparable to that of The Holocaust. But are the consequences for the population nonetheless the same--a successful elimination?

A colleague of mine believes that boylovers can continue successfully being boylovers even in today's persecution simply by quietly living their lives and loving their boys--that a political aspect to boylove isn't necessary because really, all we need is to love the actual boy and if society can't handle that, they simply don't need to know. But at the same time the rest of us debate the utilitarian calculus: if I love a boy and we do get caught, since I chose to do that knowing how society is, aren't I partly responsible for the consequences that boy has to suffer? I may not have done him the harm, but I put him in harm's way: I knew what would happen if we got caught. To believe that having a quiet relationship between me and my boy is sufficient ignores the very lesson learned by the boy about the significance of keeping quiet. By painting boylove as harmful, society has made boylove harmful. The "quiet relationship" is itself part of the Death Lite, with collateral damage. Those who subscribe to this philosophy may need to investigate whether or not they've already been exterminated, and are merely taking a boy or two with them as they go. (There's a big asterisk here--it's a topic in itself and the reality is not this black and white. But framing it that way may provide some reference points for the shades of gray.)

I've saved the punchline, though. There's something that gives this situation its own brand of volatility, something impossible to compare with The Holocaust. That fundamental difference is that Hitler believed that Jews were a threat to the economy, politics, power and stability of his nation. And he was wrong. He was a simple lunatic with an obsession and the power to carry it out on a grand scale.

In contrast, while no one actually posits that boylovers are a threat to the economy, politics, power and stability of modern society--merely a threat to the children--if someone were to say that about boylovers, he'd be very different from Hitler in one important aspect: he would be right. And that's why I can make the odd statement that fortunately, it's worse than you think.

The majority of the hysteria against us, as with the Jews, is a generated hysteria. Anyone who takes time to research the actual numbers--everything from recidivism rates to intrafamilial molestations to stranger abductions to metaresearch trends--can't help but reach the conclusion that the fear does not correspond to the threat. One possible reason for this--the one to which I subscribe--is that this is explained by the recognition that pedophilia in itself is not the threat (that is, as I've always said, anti-pedophile hysteria is not about sex, and those who dedicate their efforts to convincing people that pedophiles are good people really and sex isn't harmful are misguided in their focus). The real threat is something else--something pedophiles represent, something they bring in their wake independent of whether or not they ever have sex with a child. And while most people hate pedophiles because they've swallowed the party line--they really believe that we "destroy the souls" of children--someone, somewhere, knows the truth.

Someone knew how to exploit Adam Walsh. Someone knew how to exploit JonBenét Ramsey. Someone is spinning Madeleine McCann even as we speak. Is this a conspiracy theory? No. I doubt very much these respective "someones" are receiving common instructions beyond what their own professional journals tell them. But they don't believe their own stories, either; they know that Walshes and Ramseys and McCanns are once-a-decade rarities that don't represent the reality of the pedophile menace (if indeed pedophiles were even involved in these cases, something not conclusively demonstrated in any of them). There's no coordinated conspiracy to protect post-industrial society from the revolution boylovers represent. But these people know they are justified in responding to the threat as though it were a threat to state, not person. In much the same way as the Jews were treated as a threat to state.

And we are. In the abstract--if you accept that governments have a will to survive the same as people--they are perfectly justified in this Persecution. If they don't eliminate us now, they may not get the opportunity later. In that, not building gas chambers is the biggest mistake they've made. One which I intend to exploit fully, should I still be around when the moment comes. The fact that the oppression has become so insufferable is my biggest source of optimism because I have faith in human nature, and I believe that people who have nothing left to lose will act like people who have nothing left to lose. I'll even print up t-shirts that say, "You should have gassed us when you had the chance."

Hitler's Holocaust set the chain of events in motion which led to the current nation of Israel. And they didn't start out as a threat; they were a regular population of human beings, as peaceful as any other when left to live their own lives. But we were a threat from the very beginning. Our existence is anathema to industrial-based governments. So I won't settle for a small coastal nation like Isreal; my price is something much larger. The United States will do for starters, with option to expand. And I express my sincere appreciation to current administrations worldwide for creating my army for me.

(This, I think, is the most fun I ever have with you, Curtis: you are brilliant at setting up the analysis, and observing the potential consequences... but you've always hesitated at the very end, as though you may be a little uncomfortable with what it really means if your analysis turns out to be correct. But if you're going to use a historical metaphor, why not use the whole thing? Why end with, "I really don't know"? Why not admit outright, "The last time this happened, nations fell, new nations rose, new weapons were invented and the Jews were by no means the only ones who died in the millions"? It's a philosophical analysis. Of course we could be wrong. But I'll bet you two fives and a ten that we're not.)

Posted by Baldur on Saturday, January 31 2009 at 07:36:58pm

If the people of the world could torture and murder Jesus Christ, what hope do the rest of us innocents have?

Comparing Pedophiles to Black People

In a recent lead article of the Journal of Homosexuality (1), for example, Harris Mirkin says the "sexually privileged" have disadvantaged the pedophile through sheer political force in the same way that blacks were disadvantaged by whites before the civil-rights movement.

Slavery must have seemed immensely unfair and immoral to the person kidnapped from his homeland and brought to Rome to be whipped, raped, beaten, and worked without compensation. But the law supported it - and the laws of the West support our servitude. I think the courts are a means to negotiate a better condition of servitude, but we will always be in bondage here.

All the Above

From Niggers to Pedophiles: The Case for “MAA”

Just recently the term MAA, which stands for “minor-attracted adult”, has been appearing all across the boylove, girllove, and child-love communities. Historically whenever major changes have been made in the designation of any group it has singled a social and political shift in the way society at-large views said group and the way the group views itself.

For example, the Black community’s move from the slur “nigger” and slave to “negro” and then from “negro” to African American, African English etc. or just “Black” can fallow the movement of ethnic identity, group politics, and finally the fight for civil rights and liberties. Similarly, the homosexual movement’s claim to the term “gay” and “lesbian” (and homosexual in general) follows the same path towards freedom. In effect, these groups realized that a common identity gave them numbers (there is strength in numbers) and from the numbers came power and agency.

For me to say, “I am a boylover” identifies me in the mind of the at-large community as a certain type of “pedophile”.

But for me to say I am a minor-attracted adult links me with all boylovers, girl-lovers, ephebophiles and child-lovers. Suddenly I am not alone; suddenly I am part of something much, much larger than myself.

It is this recognition of power that the anti-“pedophile” public does not want us to realize. They do not want us to wake up and suddenly see that our numbers, if 70 MILLION in the United States, must approach the HUNDREDS of MILLIONS worldwide. Safety in numbers and resources in numbers.

The slur “nigger” has incredible power in both the white and black communities. The white community knows better than to use it these days, and the black community has re-claimed the word as its own, thereby removing the dehumanizing and derogatory power it possesses. Likewise the term “pedophile” is just as hateful a slur, and today is thrown around by the public as if we were the new “niggers” of society.

The understanding of our particular position in politics and history is very important. Gone are the 1960s and 1970s that liberated women, gays, and ethnic minorities. Today it is the women, gays, and ethnic minorities that are helping to classify us as monsters, using the P-word in the same way the N-word was used in Jim Crow America, to dehumanize and abuse a marginalized group. And it is from these margins where we must speak out loudly. MAA is a watershed event in the language used to describe pedophilic attractions. Not only is MAA extremely inclusive, but it is extremely value neutral. Neither positive or negative, it is not layered with years of misinterpretation and the current outrage over anything pedophilic.

I am an MAA, but I am also a boylover. I am one among many millions. At this juncture it is imperative that the childlove, teen-love, minor-love communities bond together under the MAA banner. Let us for once use political correctness the way it should be used: to our advantage in the fight for our human rights, the rights of children (we must never forget them), and right to take our place in society.

How do start using language to our own benefit?

We have the power of the internet at our finger tips. When posting on message boards use the MAA title as necessary.

Be conscious of academic studies that use this term (they are out there!). Finally, it is very important for boylove and girl-love blogs to start incorporating MAA into their format and their rhetoric; and of course websites such as GirlChat, BoyChat. BLISS, boylover.net, and BoyLinks MUST include this term in some manner on their pages.

Like all battles for civil rights, ours is beginning with one word. The ball is in our court, lets us strike!

United we stand,

Posted by Bill Evans on 2007-July-3 19:57:28, Tuesday

In reply to Am I my brother's keeper? posted by Will Robinson on 2007-July-1 20:59:47, Sunday

Divided we fall. An old saying that is just as true today as ever. If we don't all become "our brothers' keeper" and work to help and protect each other, they forces against us will continue to pick us off, one by one, just as the Nazis did the Jews and gays in the 1930's.

Did gays gain acceptance because they somehow briefly became a majority? Did Afro-Americans gain freedom because they suddenly became a majority? Of course not! Unless and until we show a united face to the world, we will never gain equality before the law.

Persecution got enough negros and gays pissed off that they finally stood their ground and demanded equal treatment before the law in an organised manner. How much more are we collectively going to take before we finally get up the courage to do likewise?

Plea for rationality

Stockviken, Sweden Saturday Jun 16

Some posters in this thread call for suppression of free speech and abandonment of the First Amendment to the US Constitution. Others have called for illegal law enforcement investigations and inhuman punishments. Ignorance, fear, and hate are the primary factors which tend to spawn such perverted and immoral behaviors.

Ignorance produces fear of the unknown, and fear of the unknown produces blind, unreasoning hate, in a regenerative cycle that propagates and reinforces all three. Anyone who attempts to interrupt this vicious cycle by interjecting facts and reason is attacked by those who are frightened that such facts and reason may result in change, and who thus prefer ignorance, fear, and hate to any kind of rational examination and logical discussion.

But things do change. Many of us can remember when Jews, Blacks, Homosexuals, and various others were the victims of the same triad of ignorance, fear, and hate that is now directed at boys. And make no mistake, it is boys who are the real targets here, boys who reject their assigned subhuman status, boys who thumb their noses at their sexual repression, disenfranchised boys who want to see a final end to this “last taboo.” The older males who understand and cooperate with these boys are the convenient immediate target, but the boys who choose to declare their widening autonomy by exploring and enjoying their burgeoning sexuality with these older males are targeted and traumatized (euphemistically referred to as “counseled”) just as much - and perhaps more.

One wonders if some of those who are spewing venom in this discussion are the same ones who would have - and may still - project their ignorance, fear, and blind hate at Jews, Blacks, and Homosexuals. Prejudice and bigotry, unfortunately, most likely always will be with us - as has been so amply demonstrated here. But hopefully the day will come when rationality and reason will become stronger and more prevalent than prejudice and bigotry, and light will replace the current darkness in the area of consensual sexually expressed boyhood relationships with older males.

THE PEDO/GERO MOVEMENT.

If pedo- and gerophilia are sexual orientations, then it stands to reason that we need a liberation movement like Blacks and gays have had to bring the ligitimacy of their causes to public attention. The Black liberation movement is often considered to have started with the March on Selma in the 1960s. Gay liberation had the Stonewall uprising in the same decade. Before those events, race segregation and homophobia were commonly accepted as normal and proper in many places. "Upity" blacks and gays were seen as vile and evil influences on the culture. What will it take for pedophiles and gerophiles to raise the public consciousness to accept our love as wholesome and wonderful, or at least to leave us to love in peace?

Opposition

Though there is not as much opposition to these delusions as many people would like to see, it's likely that that is because not many minorities know what these people are saying. The following are examples of minorities speaking out against such illogical comparisons.

In 1994, ILGA expelled NAMBLA and two other paedophile groups at its World Conference in New York. These groups had joined ILGA at an earlier stage of ILGA’s development, at a time when ILGA did not have in place administrative procedures to scrutinize the constitutions and policies of groups seeking membership. At no time, however, did ILGA support or endorse their positions, and these groups were expelled precisely because their aims were incompatible with those of ILGA.

Pedophiles align themselves with gays

PreserveBalance

Thursday Jun 21

Shocking title?

I hope so.

As a child advocate, you probably think I came to be all homophobic and fundamentalist on ya, but that could be farthest from the truth.

The truth is, I have recently become interested in "Anti" blogs. "Anti-pedophile" that is. Similar to PJ and Datelines, "To Catch a Predator"; a group of ordinary citizens gather to stop online kiddie porn, pedophile disbursement of information about where to find children (or a specific child), support and encouragement for their desires, exchange job postings about positions where they can be near children and how to cover your tracks, what to say to children to get them to go somewhere with you alone, and how to present pedophilia to the American public as a sexual orientation which is simply misunderstood and innocuous.

The reason I am posting this thread here is because, over the last year, I have learned a lot about pedophiles and watched how they worked (I became interested after my parenting website was hijacked by a bunch of them, trying to find out information about our readers children). Anyway, come to find out, pedophiles have an online manual as to how to promote themselves as victims. They claim they are the victims and children, as young as infants, flirt with them and come onto them constantly and beg them for sex.

If that isn't disturbing enough, and what many in the gay community might not understand, is that PEDOPHILES are aligning themselves and using statistics from the gay community to promote their sexual deviancy (and yes, unlike being gay, it is definitely a deviancy). They constantly go to Anti's blogs and say that they're just like gay people and that one-day they will be accepted. They claim they are "child lovers" and that parents are the ones abusing their children by not allowing them to have sex with adults. Again, they bring up how they are persecuted, just like gays, and how 10% of the population is pedophiles (sound like a familiar statistic?).

I wonder -- why doesn't the gay community come out against this. All over the net, pedophiles are trying to say that they are victimized like Jews in Nazi Germany and how, if people realized, that it's just like being gay, they would accept them and allow them to have sex with their children and everybody would be happy.

I'm asking the entire fine, respectable, gay people here; doesn't this piss you off to no end??? Isn't this outrageous? Forget the fundies! Pedophiles are going out of their way to claim that the gay community and pedophiles are united.

Isn't that bull??

I think the community ought to speak out against this because they are stealing ya all's identity and nothing good can come from it. It only furthers the ignorant thinking of certain individuals and confirms what they mistakenly think to be true. Pedophiles are using this as a tool for desensitization. They think if they talk about it enough and make enough comparisons, it will seep into the acceptance. They have online books where they study how to do this and aligning themselves with the gay community, they feel like this give them some credibility in a society where most people, gay and straight alike, think they're the lowest form of pond scum alive.

To pedophile advocates, any discussion of the benefits of child-adult sex is a victory. The APA should have understood this, should have known about Bauserman's connections, and should have been well aware of--and vocally resistent to--the growing movement to legalize pedophilia.

Archives : Print Edition

LETTERS

04 Jul 1997 00:00

Paedophile gravely insulting to gays

AS gay people, we distance ourselves in the strongest possible terms from Kevin Bishop, profiled in "The man who loves to love boys" (June 27 to July 3). Bishop's views do not reflect the views of the gay and lesbian community.

Reputable organisations in Johannesburg have excluded Bishop on the basis of these views and the North American Man Boy Love Association, the organisation Bishop would like to see opening an office in South Africa, has been expelled from the International Lesbian and Gay Association. We take grave exception to Bishop's statement, "Scratch the surface of the average homosexual and you will find a paedophile." On a purely superficial level, this is an outrageous statement. If Bishop is intent on having sex with children, that is his issue. However, it is insulting at best and sickening at worst to the "ordinary" lesbian or gay man to be told they want to have sex with a six-year-old. In addition, Bishop appears to understand homosexuality as being purely about sex, thereby reinforcing the commonly held stereotype of gay people. Bishop's views entirely negate the traumatic experience of children who have been abused. According to him, they should be grateful for having had the opportunity to be sexual at a young age - even more so where the adult involved was a parent, because "it is less threatening and the emotional intimacy more comfortable". Is this the way victims of paedophilia have experienced their abuse? Bishop says children should be able to make informed decisions about sex, and a little later he asserts that bestiality should be legitimised. Does this mean Bishop will have an intellectual conversation with his cat, so that it too can make an informed decision about whether to have sex with him? As gay people we find Bishop's argument absolutely outrageous and a damning indictment of the gay community. We sincerely hope any discerning, intelligent person will see Bishop for the aberration he is and not think he is representative of the "average homosexual" ...