June 6, 2012

Horace Mann School: Pedophilia or Homosexual Harassment?

From the New York Times Magazine, a long article about male teachers getting all inappropriate with boy students at an expensive NYC school a generation ago:
Prep-School Predators 
The Horace Mann School’s Secret History of Sexual Abuse

Horace Mann is a coed K-12 school, but virtually all the examples in the article involve boys in grades 7-12. For example, this NYT article has an account of how Horace Mann's gay headmaster and his middle-aged teacher boyfriend plied the author, then a 17-year-old senior on Horace Mann's baseball squad, and his 17-year-old friend Eric with drinks, while apparently ignoring the author's 12-year-old brother:
At the end of dinner, Eric and I uttered some prearranged exit line, thanked our hosts, grabbed my brother and drove off drunk into the night, leaving the two grown men to pay the bill and finish out the evening as they might.

Were these middle-aged men motivated by pedophilia or by garden-variety homosexuality? To me that sounds like asking whether Barack Obama Sr. was motivated by pedophilia when he impregnated the President's 17-year-old mother, or by heterosexuality.

If you look up "pedophilia" in Wikipedia, it says:
This article is about the sexual interest in prepubescent children. For the sexual act, see Child sexual abuse. For the primary sexual interest in 11–14 year old pubescents, see Hebephilia. For mid-to-late adolescents (15-19), see Ephebophilia. 
As a medical diagnosis, pedophilia, or paedophilia, is defined as a psychiatric disorder in adults or late adolescents (persons age 16 or older) typically characterized by a primary or exclusive sexual interest in prepubescent children (generally age 13 years or younger, though onset of puberty may vary). 

I'm fascinated by how the human mind has terrible trouble with having mixed opinions about anybody. This leads to bizarre dichotomizations in the conventional wisdom. For example, in my lifetime, Charles Darwin has been promoted past sainthood to near divine status, while his half-cousin and successor Francis Galton has been demonized as the scapegoat for all the unfortunate consequences of the Darwinian revolution.

Similarly, over the last generation we've been instructed over and over that Gay Is Good, while at the same time going through frenzies of loathing about pedophiles. Therefore, anything bad can't be homosexuality, it has to be pedophilia. 

You'll notice that the concept of "homosexual harassment" barely exists in our culture at present. Neither is the useful notion of a "gay mafia" a popular way to think about these kind of cover-ups, where some offenders are allowed to go on for years, and others are quietly eased out with a good letter of recommendation.

In 1948, George Orwell pointed out the political advantages of the nonexistence of terms.

108 comments:

Anonymous said...

Gay harassment might enter the lexicon due to John Travolta.

Anonymous said...

George Orwell would probably use a better phrase than Gay Mafia.

tspoon said...

If you add in all the times we get told we're all a little bit gay on some kind of spectrum, we can then appreciate the full logic and beauty of what gay advocates have been trying to tell us for so long - to wit - everyone's gay, except if they are gay and do something naughty - then they're straight.

Anonymous said...

Sounds like homosexuality to me and sounds similar to a case with which I am familiar.

For many years I taught at a public high school with a man who was quite effeminate and who was married to a very butch woman who was also a teacher in the district. The couple had an adopted son who was out of college when this incident occurred.

Most of us who knew the couple simply assumed that the marriage was one of companionship and that it met the emotional, if not the physical, needs of both partners.

In addition to thinking the male teacher gay, we also believed him to be an alcoholic. He never appeared drunk at school, yet at faculty functions off campus, we noticed he drank heavily, and we suspected that he sometimes left campus at lunch time for a nip, but we really had no proof of that. As he grew older, it seemed he came up with more and more reasons to leave campus during the lunch break, and we noticed he had begun to stay in his room for segments of his prep period, something he had not previously done. That got us to thinking he had a bottle stored somewhere in there. We were aware that over the last few years, he had grown moody and acerbic to many, behavior which stood in contrast to his former social and chatty self. There was at least one teacher who swore she could smell alcohol on his breath.

One day during the week of finals, I was in the faculty room with him when the principal walked in and solemnly and tersely asked him to come to his office, adding, "Bring your gradebook." A half an hour later, he came back, ashen, gathered up his keys (I knew then he must have been asked to turn them in), and took off, without saying a word. It was the last I ever saw him.

It seems he had hired two seniors, tall, well-built wrestlers who were in one of his classes, to go to his house during the lunch hour to move furniture. The boys liked him, said, "Sure." They went, moved the furniture, were paid for their trouble, and were also fed burgers or tacos or some such fast food the teacher had picked up on the way to his house.

A few days later in the week, he asked them again to do the same, saying he had another moving chore for them. Again, they obliged.

This time, however, after they completed the moving, he asked them if they'd mind demonstrating some of their wrestling maneuvers. The boys thought it was a weird, funny request, but they did demonstrate something pretty basic. Then, it turned downright creepy: he wanted them to show them more moves, suggesting they'd be more comfortable demonstrating if they removed their shirts.

They high-tailed it out of there at that point. I can't recall if they went directly to their parents or to the principal, but that was the end of a thirty year career. My understanding is that he was told, "Leave now and you keep your retirement; fight it through the union and you risk losing your retirement, and the kids' parents will take this to the police."

He left. About a year later his wife filed for divorce. A year or so after that, he married another woman in a ceremony in a hot air balloon in Napa County. Go figure.

It wasn't pedophilia as these boys were developed young men. It was a repressed gay man whose alcoholism had removed his impulse control.

Pincher Martin said...

Michael Ovitz, who was once one of the most powerful men in the entertainment business, blamed the Hollywood "gay mafia" for his downfall.

That was over ten years ago. So the idea of gay people banding together to wield power for their own benefit is not new to the public. Ovitz used "gay mafia" loosely (not everyone in it was gay, he said) and he was disparaged for his homophobia, but it's not as if the term doesn't exist.

Anonymous said...

anon at 6/7/12 12:05 AM

Interesting story. But, it got me thinking, kids are such snitches nowadays. If a gay came on to me growing up, I wouldn´t go crying to mommy and tell on the troubled freak. Heck, growing up a teacher smacked me around, but it never occured to me to tell on him like a pussy.

Another thing, how come these male students rat out there female teachers that are having sex with them? Ahem... but the was a dream of mine if I could ever get it.

Simon in London said...

I agree, good point.

For a heterosexual example, the Pakistani gangs preying on 15 year old white English underclass girls are routinely called paedophiles in the British media, whereas their attraction is clearly to exploitable post-pubescents who would be of marriageable age in traditional Pakistani culture. The Pakistanis clearly do not consider themselves pedophiles and show no sign of being attracted to pre-pubescents.

Anonymous said...

Homosexual pedophilia often has to do with sex (sex for pleasure) and the fixation on the beauty of young boys for sex, e.g. see Roman Catholic priests.

Heterosexual "pedophilia" (victims are often late teenage girls so it's ephebophilia) is more of a fixed attraction to young women which you can impregnate and it's the thrill of reproduction, e.g. look at patriarchs who go after young girls (whether it be Christianity or Islam or Hinduism or whatever).

Men who seek young women is a fertility fixation combined with the allure of those young innocent, pure girls which you can reproduce with. It typically isn't about sex for pleasure since a lot of these men call immodest and sexualized women (e.g. modern Western women) whores or harlots.

Anonymous said...

Great insight there re the canonization of Darwin and the demonizing of Galton. I'll bookmark this one.

Tim Howells

Anonymous said...

Simon, I can't fault your rationality, but does it make your blood boil, these Pakis seducing young white girls into sluttitude? Or is reason all?

Gilbert Pinfold.

BritRob said...

I am puzzled that the case of
Frank Lombard didn't get more coverage on the right wing internet.
He was a white employee of Duke University, who raped his 2 year old adopted black son. He also offered him online to others to come and do the same. That is how he was caught.
White on black rape,Duke University, sound familiar?

slumber_j said...

As people now condescendingly say to each other on the Internet, please seek help. I would recommend the pre-pastoral care of future Episcopal priest and former Garden-State Governor Jim McGreevey, who's in a position to explain absolutely everything.

jeanne said...

Ooh, didn't Kerouac go to Horace Mann? Yes! But just a year.

As a Catholic, I am happy to see this kind of stuff come out about other schools. I think education is rife with homosexuals. Let's face it, gays have always been attracted to teaching, and working with young people. They are some of the most dedicated teachers! As they were some of our best priests. lol.

As for the dichotomy, a very angry Catholic educator once wrote, the as we normalize formerly illicit behaviors, the more draconian our reactions must be to those that remain, because the distinctions are so arbitrary. Here, the difference is but a few years in age.

Anonymous said...

i agree -- we have been brainwashed that gay is good.

but there must be one or more reasons that this is so.

If I dissect an arctic fox and a southern fox, what difference will I find? Are those differences random? Why or why not?

Peel another layer off that onion, steve.

Ask why the arctic fox is different from the southern fox.

Anonymous said...

Thank you for pointing out this article. It is interesting to read how America's future leaders were raised. Now the question is how universal this was, across the American upper class.

Bruce Banner said...

During WWII, a close friend of Kerouac (both attended Horace Mann)was stalked by a teacher (according to the fictionalized account: Vanity of Duluoz). He had to kill the old man, as he put it. Jack Kerouac was even arrested as a material witness in the murder (he hid the knife). His friend went on to work for United Press. Yeah, he got away with the murder and became a journalist! Those were different times.

Anonymous said...

Conversation with David Brooks

India's Massive School Lunch Program Aims to Curb Widespread Malnutrition

Anonymous said...

Yes, this is something that has been known for a while by everyone who was actually paying close attention to the Catholic Church's "pedophile" priest scandal. If memory serves (I don't have the exact numbers at hand), something like 93% or more of all cases involved postpubescent teenagers, though the media have tended to focus on the more obviously repulsive cases involving young children (mostly for understandable man-bites-dog reasons, though hostility to the Church might also be part of it).

The other big part of the scandal that nobody really wants to discuss is the influence of the "Lavender Mafia" which fostered a widespread climate of winking at the seduction of teenagers. The percentage of priests who were ever credibly accused of anything is incredibly small, but the "bad eggs" were able to do damage all out of proportion to their numbers because their friends in the bureaucracy were able to convince the bishops to move them around from parish to parish, instead of actually punishing them (most abusers were given ineffectual, slap-on-the-wrist revolving-door "rehab" programs, if anything).

(I have zero actual evidence to support this, other than the case of Rembert Weakland, but I have always suspected that implied blackmail may have been a big factor in many cases- "Hey, bishop so-and-so, if you try to crack down on gay priests in your diocese, we'll tell reporters about your secret mistress".)

Chicago said...

In retrospect, in view of all the things that have come to light, one ends up reevaluating the actual motives some of these men had in choosing where they would position themselves: teachers, gym coaches, Catholic priests, boy scout leaders, and other positions that put them into proximity with young people with themselves having the advantage of being an authority figure. It all doesn't seem to be so accidental when one steps back and looks at the pattern.
Notice that in most cases their outward stance is that they are concerned with 'helping' young people.

Anonymous said...

Education in India: Profile of a Poor Public School

DCThrowback said...

The "gay mafia" was also tied into several plot lines in the show Entourage. Lloyd, Ari's assistant for the first 3 or 4 seasons (before he became an agent himself) utilized his gay contacts to help Ari through some crises.

So, not only did Larry Sanders utilize this joke at least once, Entourage, the most 'insider of insider' shows, used it as well.

Anonymous said...

http://youtu.be/Mwk4724I3vg

http://www.youtube.com/user/keithballard1/videos

Anonymous said...

gay mafia

shhhhh

keep the homerta

Gabe Ruth said...

http://thelastpsychiatrist.com/2012/02/pedophilia_is_normal_because_o.html

Anonymous said...

Pedophilia is a tragic condition, the victims of pedophilia (the condition) are not to be blamed but instead, to be pitied and understood.

They can't help themselves.

Anonymous said...

"Homosexual pedophilia often has to do with sex (sex for pleasure) and the fixation on the beauty of young boys for sex, e.g. see Roman Catholic priests."

Or New York rabbis.

FTFY

The Anti-Gnostic said...

Youth is arousing, for straight and gay alike. Teenagers are easily manipulated, so when a 20-year old buck resists some old queen's advances, he moves to the next target of opportunity: a teenager he has better odds of physically and mentally overpowering.

Men are predators. Heterosexuals with poor impulse control will act the same way. The idea that the Sainted Homo is above such tawdry desires is another example of the Left's ignorant, anti-biological imperative.

Anonymous said...

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/global/2012/06/greek-political-debate-turns-live-tv-slap-fight/53256/

war is hellas

Rain And said...

It's dumb that a clinical term "Ephebophilia" exists at all. What do psychiatrists call men who are attracted to women aged 23-27? What's that mental illness called? How about a 30-39 preference? What's that called? Or is that considered sanity in the Amanda Marcotte DSM?

What about men who are attracted to post-menopausal women? What is their psychological disease? At least "Hebephiles" can father children. A man attracted to 50 year old women is just as dysfunctional as a pedophile from an evolutionary standpoint.

Anonymous said...

It's an interesting question why some get fired for inappropriate conduct in the workplace while others get to carry on with their habits. I suspect it comes down to your relationship with your boss. If you're productive, esteemed, and personally liked by management you can do no wrong, even when you do. But if management takes a dislike toward you for any reason, expect every minute detail of your conduct will be interpreted as grounds for dismissal.

I suspect on the basis of no evidence that most of the victims at Horace Mann were financial aid students.

Sheila said...

The Thinking Housewife has an excellent post on Ephebophilia.

Anonymous said...

"Men who seek young women is a fertility fixation combined with the allure of those young innocent, pure girls which you can reproduce with. It typically isn't about sex for pleasure since a lot of these men ..."

What a hoot--as if those "men who seek young women" aren't excited by firm, round breasts and buttocks. Yeah, right.

Dan said...

Anonymous at 12:05- good story but did the Principal really tell the guy to"bring his grade book"?

Or have you watched too many football movies?

Dan in DC

Aaron B. said...

No one would take a single, heterosexual man and make him the "house mother" of a girls' boarding high school, give him free license to roam through their locker rooms and dorms, and have him counsel them about their personal problems. If you did, he'd be squeezing the 16-year-old Charmin sooner or later, and no one would be a bit surprised. No one would call him a pedophile, either; they'd call him a dirty old man.

And yet we're told that it's fine to put homosexual men in that same position by making them headmasters of boys' schools and Boy Scout troop leaders. For that to be true, gay can't just be as good as straight; homosexual men would have to have more personal restraint than straights do. Does anyone think that's the case?

Henry Canaday said...

Mark Steyn has a nice term for a certain type of modern male: a "pre-op transexual."

There are a lot of clever people writing on the Internet. Steyn is the only one who makes me drool with envy.

Aaron in Israel said...

Noteworthy, maybe, that Nabokov covered both those bases in his two most famous books: pedophilia in Lolita, of course, and gay sexual harassment in Pale Fire. In the latter, the narrator's obsessive homosexuality is a big part of what makes him so repulsive. But it seems that contemporary readers are completely blind to that important characteristic. I don't think they can even accept its repulsiveness as a donnée, so they just completely ignore it. Richard Rorty, in his (generally clueless) intro to a paperback edition, doesn't even mention it. I don't think Ron Rosenbaum mentioned it in the stuff I read by him about the book. Wikipedia mentions homosexuality only once, "the operetta-quaint and homosexually gratified palace life" imagined by the insane narrator. The narrator is a bad and repulsive homosexual, as Humbert Humbert is a bad and repulsive pedophile. But the two are read totally differently from each other today.

Anonymous said...

There has always been an element of what is called pedophilia in homosexual culture when it is a man/girl.

It is called something else entirely when it is man/boy or woman/girl (the 'Vagina Monologues' has a woman recounting her 'first time' at the age of 13 with a much older woman). The yearly spoken performance of the Vagina Monologues usually changes the age of the girl to 16 when/if it is used.

Homosexuality is the very definition of a paraphilia but it is not included as such by the mainstream psychological community since the seventies. My psychologist mother-in-law even tried to argue it had never been included.

Indulging in one paraphilia is likely to lead to indulging in others. Just as indulging in one drug can lead to indulging in others. When I worked in prisons most of the sex offenders had more than one kind of deviant sexual behavior in their past and it showed.

An experienced officer (or convict for that matter) could watch the 'chain' get off the bus and say who was a drug dealer, who was in for murder or other violent crime, the thieves, and druggies (often a little of each since most thieves are caught trying to support their habits) and especially the rapists and child molesters. It is like the 'Mark of Cain'. Sometimes I wondered why the general public didn't see it.

Now I know that a segment of the public is willfully blind or willing to sacrifice other people's children. That has greatly improved my view of my fellow man.

TWS

pat said...

The Toxoplasma Gondii parasite is supposed to cycle between cats and mice just as the Trichinella spiralis is supposed to cycle between pigs and rodents. When they get into humans by mistake they cause disease - homosexuality and trichinosis respectively.

T. Gondii causes a number of mental conditions or diseases in humans including schizophrenia and bad driving.

http://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/9/11/03-0143_article.htm

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2012/03/how-your-cat-is-making-you-crazy/8873/

Normally the parasite which is common in humans stays high in the brain but it also can attack sub-cortical structures like the amygdala. Involvement with the amygdala leads to bad driving through loss of fear. Involvement with the hypothalamus leads to homosexuality.

Homosexuality appears to be a reversal of the target for sexual attraction in the hypothalamic nucleus at INAH3. That means that the gay sub-cortical brain structures are infected. Apparently this also accounts for the fact that there are so many more gay sexual paraphilias. T. Gondii infection does more than just reverse the target. It brings about a host of changes in the limbic system. We see these changes in the spate of gay cannibals that have recently been in the news.

Gay sex is often rather nasty sex.

Albertosaurus

Anonymous said...

There's a perfectly good term for adult male homos' attraction to pubescent boys and very young (or young-looking) men: pederasty. The term's been around and understood for many centuries. The recent misuse of the term "pedophilia" is a bit of a mystery. Perhaps people want to disguise the fact that this is a special category of perversion unique to male homosexuals by conflating it with a perversion (pedophilia) indulged in by both homos and heteros.

And Anon at 6/7/12 2:21am is right: When heteros go after pubescent or very young women, it has entirely to do with reproduction and virginity --- and there are evolutionary explanations for this. When homos go after pubescent or very young men, it has entirely to do with sexual indulgence and psychological problems.

Big Bill said...

You got me! I started reading all the comments in the NYT article and wound up an hour late for work.

All I could think of was "Tom Brown's School Days" from their descriptions of the rampant homosexual rape and petty sadism at their schools.

I guess if you pattern yourself after English public schools of the mid 19th Century, like Horace Mann, Choate, Exeter, et al did, you will inevitably attract the same sadistic buggering teachers and students like honey attracts flies.

Richard Woland said...

Having been a Yuppie in San Francisco in the 80s, I have spent my time around gays. I even lived in Noe Valley (the Castro if you are gay) for about a year. For the longest time I could not figure out how I could instinctively tell when someone was gay and vice versa until it struck me like a lightning bolt; gays all try to look younger. They are even more obsessed with age then women and it defines the entire sexual pecking order. They are extremely concerned about their weight and they generally keep their hair short to minimize the effects of hair loss. But what I really notice is that they tend to dress like someone 10 years younger than themselves, albeit in whatever campy trendy way is popular in the gay sub-culture. At least straight women can graduate out of the sexual market place into other roles after they marry, and have a family but since this option really does not exist in the gay community they have no other proxy for their sexual market value. This means they are perpetually defined by who they are sexually in more ways than just liking other men.

riches said...

Years ago the often-invaluable Ms. Coulter answered the tired Church slur noted above by pointing out that college professors outperform priests in homosexual abuse of minors.

What she wouldn’t write is that priests got the spotlight because the Tribe had no interest in undermining one of its subsets, academia – not when the West’s oldest vessel for cohesion was available.

And the Church’s stash, even if compared to the Ivies’ endowments, proved too alluring to trial lawyers (another Tribe subset ).

Anonymous said...

"I'm fascinated by how the human mind has terrible trouble with having mixed opinions about anybody. This leads to bizarre dichotomizations in the conventional wisdom."

Well, it's like people like to be dry or they like to be wet(in pool or shower). What they don't like is humidity, something between dryness and wetness. Dryness is comfortable and wetness can be fun/refreshing. But humidity is discomforting.
Morality is the same. People like good guy vs bad guy, not complexities that force one to think.

Btw, most people don't THINK morally. Too lazy or too stupid. They just go along. Mass morality is sheep morality.
If the mass media has idealized incest and filled TV with incest heroes and saints while it had ignored or mocked gays in the past 20 yrs, the big issue today would be 'incest marriage', not 'gay marriage'.

Mass morality conforms to the display of colors, iconography, idolatry, and recitation of simple slogans like 'diversity is our strength'. Sloganology is what masses go for, not thought. Add slogans to songs, dance, and flags, and you have a movement. Of course, all that stuff is expensive and needs a degree of creativity, and so ones with money and talent for expression wins the morality sweepstakes.

Diversity against Pedophobia. said...

Why do they call love for children 'molestation' and 'abuse'?
In this world that is filled with so much hate and violence, what is sooooo wrong about loving children?
Oh, we are still so puritanical and repressive.

Anonymous said...

If kids shouldn't be treated like sex objects, why is it okay to sell dress and makeup to kids to dress up like sex objects? I mean which age group was Britney Spears marketed at?

Anonymous said...

Is porn being available to children a form of 'child sexual abuse'?

Anonymous said...

Off-topic iSteve Performance Enhancing Drugs alert: Hilary Swank on 'roids?!?

That's exactly what the 1976 East German women's swimming team looked like at the Olympic Games in Montreal.

Anonymous said...

what I really notice is that they tend to dress like someone 10 years younger than themselves


The default American "uniform", at least for men, is jeans, sneakers, and tee-shirt. How do you tell if somebody is trying to dress younger then themselves?


the longest time I could not figure out how I could instinctively tell when someone was gay and vice versa until it struck me like a lightning bolt; gays all try to look younger.


You can't tell if somebody is gay by looking at them. Here in NY I know plenty of gay men who are old, fat, and ugly. The peculiar notion that they are all young, thin and good-looking is a media construct, rather like the "noble Negro" so popular in entertainment.

Anonymous said...

Is porn being available to children a form of 'child sexual abuse'?


Yes.

Anonymous said...

All I could think of was "Tom Brown's School Days" from their descriptions of the rampant homosexual rape and petty sadism at their schools.

Bullying, yes, but rape? Even implied rape? That's news to me. I doubt a Victorian novel would be so frank.

Cennbeorc

Anonymous said...

http://youtu.be/7Lzs5zo_lSo

Sobran

such were the joys said...

Steve, you may look at it as an impediment toward mixed opinions & nuances, however it's simpler to just observe that denial springs eternal. Sexual perversion aided by abuse of authority in a school setting is just going to be there, forever, to a more or lesser degree, and can't be eradicated through "reform." Indeed we'll just introduce new variables like co-ed classes, AA, federal testing standards that screw up the flawed equation even better. Any institution now that's only 90% free of social horror has to be watered down to about 50% in the name of equality.

Paul Mendez said...

Goodbye, Good Men: How Liberals Brought Corruption into the Catholic Church by Michael S Rose. (c)2002.

http://www.amazon.com/Goodbye-Good-Men-Liberals-Corruption/dp/0895261448

"Goodbye, Good Men provides the real story behind the sex scandal currently rocking the Catholic church. Investigative reporter Michael Rose has conducted countless interviews and exhaustive research to uncover several out-of-control seminaries as the root cause of the scandal. While most pundits and critics are calling for liberalization of the Church in the wake of these scandals, Rose presents compelling evidence that liberal influence is the very cause of the crisis. The revelations in Goodbye, Good Men will shock the nation and ignite a firestorm of debate on the subject."

Simon in London said...

Gilbert Pinfold:
"Simon, I can't fault your rationality, but does it make your blood boil, these Pakis seducing young white girls into sluttitude? Or is reason all?"

It does make me angry, but primarily at the white ruling class who created this situation by destroying the white working class and importing alien and hostile cultures. The Pakistanis' behaviour remind me of the 'frog & the scorpion' tale - they are behaving 'naturally', according to their own lights - leaving aside possible murders reported by eg the BNP that have not made the mainstream media http://www.facebook.com/pages/Justice-for-Charlene-Downes/215000118524703?sk=info
Being angry at them would be like being angry at Al Qaeda, or the weather.

I probably don't have as visceral a reaction as if the victims were my more immediate Northern Ireland Protestant kinfolk, though.

Steve Sailer said...

Pale Fire

Right, Nabokov's Charles Kinbote / King Charles the Beloved is a seriously messed up man, a homosexual of the fairly rare but troublesome misogynistic varietal who think that sex with little boys, big boys, and young men is much more manly than sex with women. You do not want this kind of man to be your son's drill instructor at Parris Island. General William Odom told me that this type was the main problem the military had with gays: effeminate men don't enlist much, but the macho gays are the ones most likely to run amok sexually once they get power over young men.

agnostic said...

The term "pedophile" only refers to the person's inner desires, not their realized behavior. So that's another layer of whitewashing.

The terms "child molester" or "kiddie fiddler" remind us that desires lead to actions. Your "sexual orientation" or "preference" is not like your favorite number, which isn't really a desire or drive.

During the liberal heyday of the mid-20th C, they also framed gay child molesters in inner psychological terms, namely the "sex psychopath." It was normal then to recommend nothing be done about child sex abuse -- it would only scar the child, and anyway the molester was a confused and stunted man who you should feel pity for, not punish.

It wasn't until people became aware of desires leading to actions that the term "child molester" became popular, gradually from the 1960s through the early '90s or so.

Now it's only about "pedophiles" or maybe "sex predators." The latter gets a little closer to defining them by actions, but still backs off from referring to the act of molesting the person. It just says they're sort of circling around a victim with harmful intentions, whether they actually pounce on them or not.

You don't want a term that is too many words, or too polysyllabic, since that obscures what it means. And also invites whitewashers to turn it into a sterilized acronym.

"Homo-lesters" sounds a bit goofy and try-hard. Then I'm no wordsmith. "Fag molesters," "Queer molesters"... I don't know, but the word molester should be in there to keep the focus on the act of perversion itself, not some hypothetically harmless desire.

heartiste said...

anon:
"Homosexual pedophilia often has to do with sex (sex for pleasure) and the fixation on the beauty of young boys for sex, e.g. see Roman Catholic priests."

pedophilia is a mental disorder wherein the sex center of the brain has been crosswired to feel arousal at the sight of prepubescent children. that is, children who have no secondary sex characteristics. this is wholly distinct from arousal at the sight of, for example, a fully sexually developed 17 year old girl. but feminists and their white knighting ilk have been on a campaign to conflate pedophilia with perfectly normal male lust for young, sexually fertile women. the reason for their propaganda campaign should be obvious.

gay men, like straight men, rely mostly on visual cues of attractiveness. for straight men, this means nubile young women in the 15-25 year old range (the salad years, as the estimable derb once put it) are the most sexually alluring. in gays, i imagine their sexual response works similarly to straight men's, except oriented toward other men instead of women. so gay men are likely going to feel the most attraction for young men. it's not for nothing that the stereotype of the older, desperate queen exists.

where it gets dicey is the possible overrepresentation of gay men among *genuine* pedophiles. if it's true that gays are disproportionately found among the ranks of the sexually abnormal men who get aroused by the sight of prepubescent children, (a hypothesis which is strengthened by the fact that many child victims of male pedophiles are boys), then we have to ask if homosexuality itself predisposes men to pedophilia in a way that heterosexuality does not.

re: the catholic church. the celibacy requirement has likely selected for priests who are closeted gays. if the above theory is correct -- that homosexuality and pedophilia are intricately entwined -- then it should not be a surprise that priests are disproportionate pedophilia offenders.

"Men who seek young women is a fertility fixation"

fertility fixation, aka normal male sexual functioning.

"It typically isn't about sex for pleasure"

it sure is! the pleasure begets the gene transmission.

"since a lot of these men call immodest and sexualized women (e.g. modern Western women) whores or harlots."

men may call them that (though it is more likely that competitor women call them that), but that doesn't detract from men's desire to have sex with them if they are young and curvaceous. if you've ever been out during garbage hour at a club, you'll see that those "harlots" are the women that men will try to bring home, thinking they'll be more amenable to quick sex.

NOTA said...

Aaron B:

That's my take on it, too. You don't put straight men in positions where they could easily get sexually involved with physically mature but not emotionally mature girls, not because heterosexual men include a lot of pedophiles, but rather because a 16 year old girl is physically mature, could bear kids, and gives the right physical and emotional signals to interest a man. Most men won't chase a girl that young for reasons of morals or self-respect or fear of the law, but some will--so straight men ought not to be in the position to do that. For the same reason, gay men ought not to be scout leaders or have similar roles--most gay men would never do anything inappropriate in that situation, but some would, and there is no good reason to put them in the position to be tempted and put the boys at risk.

FWIW, in my boys' scout activities, there is a huge push for parents to be involved, largely because when a 40 year old man brings his 11 year old son to a boy scout campout, it's overwhelmingly likely his motives are centered around helping his boy grow up well and have fun, rather than oggling the teenage boys. And all kinds of bad behavior is just a whole lot less likely in the presence of lots of parents.

This is not fundamentally an issue of pedophilia--the overwhelming majority of men respond to cues of physical and sexual maturity. Gay men respond to physically mature males, straight men to physically mature females.

My impression with the Catholic priests' scandals is that:

a. Most of the abuse was homosexual.

b. Mostly the targets were adolescents or older--I'm not sure what fraction were more or less physically mature, but I think the targets often were pretty young adolescents.

c. Most of the perps were closeted gay men who probably had joined the priesthood as some combination of cover and attempt not to be something they didn't want to be.

d. The damage was so great becaus the Church's generic solution to sex scandals is to quiet it down as much as possible and transfer the priest somewhere far away. When the sex scansal involves an adult, this is probably the best that can be done. When it involves a serial pedophile, this amounts to transferring the wolf from one sheep pen to the next.

Simon in London said...

Steve Sailer:
"a homosexual of the fairly rare but troublesome misogynistic varietal who think that sex with little boys, big boys, and young men is much more manly than sex with women..."

Jack Donovan types?
http://www.jack-donovan.com/axis/2012/03/the-way-of-men-masculinity-explained/

I'm guessing that gays-in-the-military was not aimed at helping these guys, more the effeminate Bradley Manning 'Air Force Gays'. Although the greatest beneficiaries are presumably lesbians, who are probably better soldiers than straight women, for whatever that's worth. I tend to think they should have banned straight women from most of the military.

Richard Woland said...

It needs to be pointed out that the clergy, specifically the Catholic clergy, was historically the safest closet to hide in. The fact that Catholic Priests cannot marry means that there was no need for a sham marriage to conceal ones true sexual preference. This was particularly true when everybody was expected to marry and have children and people who did not were looked on askance. Not everyone could make a career in the Royal Navy you know.

Anonymous said...

The default American "uniform", at least for men, is jeans, sneakers, and tee-shirt. How do you tell if somebody is trying to dress younger then themselves?

Younger than straight men I guess. Everyone is trending to dress younger.

There are still gradiations of youth signalling with the jeans and t-shirt menu - based around cuts and logos and so forth.

When heteros go after pubescent or very young women, it has entirely to do with reproduction and virginity --- and there are evolutionary explanations for this. When homos go after pubescent or very young men, it has entirely to do with sexual indulgence and psychological problems.

Well obviously there aren't really evolutionary reasons for anything gay people do, sexually. But it seems more likely to me it's just a weird twist of the same evolutionary logic that drives hetero men to go after "pubescent or very young women", rather than something more unique.

Just seems more parsimonious.

Anonymous said...

where it gets dicey is the possible overrepresentation of gay men among *genuine* pedophiles. if it's true that gays are disproportionately found among the ranks of the sexually abnormal men who get aroused by the sight of prepubescent children, (a hypothesis which is strengthened by the fact that many child victims of male pedophiles are boys), then we have to ask if homosexuality itself predisposes men to pedophilia in a way that heterosexuality does not.

This might be the case, actually I think there is evidence for it, but I've never understood the mechanism of it.

What makes the gays get turned on (as I understand it) are adult male characteristics like body hair, muscles, big bones, tall, penis size, sweaty, rough skin and so forth.

Little boys and girls completely lack such characteristics.

Moreover adult men are more dissimilar from children generally than adult women are - women are neotenous. Adult women have small size, childlike face shape, childlike body fat, no body hair, low muscle development and generally cease development earlier after less change from the child form than adult men.

It just seems like little boys are not a more plausible target for male adult homosexuals than male adult heterosexuals, because they don't particularly have many more characteristics in common with the adult male homos chosen targets (adult males) than they do with adult male heteros (adult women). Sure the little boys have the penis, but I don't see how that's enough to override the fact that the homo orientation seems completely oriented away from childlike characteristics even more than the hetero one.

Anonymous said...

http://www.forbes.com/sites/danielmitchell/2012/06/07/estonia-and-austerity-another-exploding-cigar-for-paul-krugman/

Anonymous said...

Surprised by blogtroversies in google about whether that Miami-based Last Psych writer linked above is male. From 20 min reading it's obviously a she, as I note from obsession with Jez/Feministing as well as author's seeming inability ever to come to the point. Then again you could claim one of those on Heartiste.

Marlowe said...

See the following story of one man's experience while reporting for the BBC.


The victim, named only as Andrew, was a news organiser in the corporation's political programmes department when he began receiving unwanted attention from Jonathan Steer, it was claimed.

Mr Steer, a picture editor for who worked alongside senior staff John Simpson and Nick Robinson, claims his behaviour was a "cry for help".

The Central London Employment Tribunal heard that after Andrew, which is not his real name, was invited to dinner with Mr Steer, he was bombarded with messages discussing their "sexual chemistry".

The victim, who is now a senior broadcast journalist, also received dozens of phone calls in the middle of the night.

The victim's former partner was sent messages from Mr Steer, 42, which included a link posted on Facebook, the social networking site, that asked "how good are you at gay sex?".

The tribunal was told they had left his victim terrified he would turn up at his home late at night.

Mr Steer, who began work for the BBC in 1996, also allegedly sent a letter to Andrew's elderly parents in which he refers to an HIV test.


Mr Steer, who suffers from bipolar disorder, was subsequently dismissed from his role and is now claiming disability discrimination and unfair dismissal.

The tribunal was told that the harassment began after the dinner in December 2008.

In his witness statement, Andrew said Mr Steer insisted on paying for dinner, kissed him on the cheek to say goodbye and then implied to colleagues that the pair had become intimate.

Anonymous said...

One of the greatest victories of the gay controlled media was turning pedophilia into a 'power' issue as opposed to a homosexual derangement.

Anonymous said...

MAGIC OF BELLE ISLE

Didn't they leave out "Negro"?

Simon in London said...

I said upthread that Pakistani gang murders of white girls were not reported in the UK media - but this is in today's Daily Mail - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2155823/Social-workers-hid-fact-knew-teenage-mother-risk-sex-grooming-gangs-SIX-YEARS-brutally-murdered.html

Anonymous said...

The point about how we're told that "we're all a little gay" reminds me of a similar phenomenon that I think should be discussed more. It's how public health types and the media encourage the myth the social dysfunction is spread evenly throughout the population. They took a true statement -- that alcoholism (or wife beating or child abuse or other concern du jour) can be found "in every neighborhood, rich and poor alike" -- and quietly replaced it with a falsehood -- that alcoholism et al. are equally common in every neighborhood, rich and poor alike.

- A Solid Citizen

Anonymous said...

"Adult women have small size, childlike face shape, childlike body fat, no body hair, low muscle development and generally cease development earlier after less change from the child form than adult men."

Depends on race. Thai men and women are nearly indistinguishable at 20 paces -- both look feminine. It's why there are apparently so many attractive Asian women: both parents usually look feminine. Black men and women are also indistinguishable, but both look masculine. In whites, you see the most exaggerated differences between men and women, appearance-wise. And since masculine white men tend to pair off with feminine white women, they produce as many masculine as feminine looking female (and male) offspring. So in the white population, expect more women who look like Sarah Jessica Parker and Rumur Willis (transvestite donkey witches), and men who look like Richard Simmons and Cory Feldman (flamers).

Jack Donovan said...

Looks like I was name-dropped somewhere in this thread, so here are my two cents, as a homosexual male who writes about masculinity and sexuality....

Heartiste is correct that, like straight men, a lot of homosexual men are attracted to young, but *post-pubescent* examples of their objects of attraction. Men basically awaken sexually as teenagers, and we're going to have some strong positive sexual associations with sex objects around that age, probably for our whole lives.

Camille Paglia wrote, when comparing lesbians to homosexual men, that “Gay men appreciate pornography [...] because they accept the Hellenic principle that some people are born more beautiful than others."

It's a cliche for straight men to seek out young women, even as they get older. Many homosexual men do the same thing. Some people are just more attractive, and younger men are more likely to be at the peak of health, strength, vitality and good looks.

Like heterosexual men, homosexual men are fully capable of following legal rules about sexual contact with individuals of a certain age. And they should be held to the same standards as far as that is concerned.

Men who covet *pre-pubescent* boys or girls are fucked up in the head, and should be treated as such. That's a completely different thing altogether, and I don't think the majority of homosexual men have that problem. I certainly have never mentally crossed into that realm even for a moment. That's not even funny to joke about.

If men who abuse boys are overrepresented in the population of men who abuse children, I don't think that should reflect on the majority of law abiding homosexual men who have never entertained the possibility of abusing a child.

The term "homosexual harassment" should be used for post-pubescent gay males who sexually harass post-pubescent straight males. It's a real phenomenon, it probably happens more often today than it ever has in history, and I think it's completely fair to talk about it.

Anonymous said...

Dan in DC asked, Anonymous at 12:05- good story but did the Principal really tell the guy to"bring his grade book"?

"Or have you watched too many football movies?"

I don't get the joke evidently. Maybe you could explain it to me. Yes, of course he really said that.

Eric said...

Therefore, anything bad can't be homosexuality, it has to be pedophilia.

There's a wider trend at work here, and it's not just in stories about gay people. A person who has sex with a sexually mature person is not a pedophile. He may be breaking a sacred trust of some sort. He may be breaking the law. But he's not a pedophile.

My brother's wife is a stay-at-home mother with one child. The child spends most of the day in school, so she doesn't have much to do, really, and spends time with similarly situated mothers (at Starbucks, naturally) hyperventilating over news stories like this one. That's why these stories make the paper, after all.

Anyway, I've noticed these women have taken to calling the older person in any relationship with an age gap a pedophile. In their minds, a forty year old man who dates a twenty year old woman is a pedophile, as is this week's hot female teacher who slept with a strapping 17 year old football player. And it seems this usage is creeping into the general lexicon.

Aaron B. said...

"[G]ays all try to look younger. They are even more obsessed with age then women and it defines the entire sexual pecking order. They are extremely concerned about their weight and they generally keep their hair short to minimize the effects of hair loss."

A decade or so ago, there were a lot of ads on TV for some kind of permanent hair removal tonic. I have some long hair on my shoulders, so I looked it up on the Internet to see if it was legit. I got quite an education: about 99% of the discussion I found was by homosexuals wishing to remove all their body hair. There is a clear fraction of homosexuals who are attracted to pre-pubescent bodies. I don't know what the fraction is, but it's large enough that men looking to attract other men know that it will help. I don't think there's anything like that in heterosexuality: 30-year-old women try to look 18, not 12.

On the Catholic scandal: I spent four years in a Catholic high school seminary, and three of my (priest) teachers were later exposed as sex abusers. I didn't have a clue at the time, but looking back, I can recognize some signs. I'll second the recommendation for Michael Rose's Goodbye, Good Men. It tells the story very well. As NOTA said, priests were moved around as part of a coverup. But what made it even worse was that the reigning psychobabble of the time said that an offender could be fixed with some time off and counseling. So they'd send a guy off for counseling, the shrink would declare him fixed, and he'd be moved to a new location to get a fresh start. Then he'd do it again. The Church was doing what all the experts at the time said should be done, and what was being done with non-Catholic teachers and others who worked with kids in every other part of society, usually in greater numbers than priests.

It's probably true that a celibate clergy will attract more than its share of homosexuals. (Although I can guarantee you that we homophobic young boys in seminary worried about that, so we were on our guard against other students. Eyes forward in the shower at all times.) But before 1950 or so, a Catholic seminary would immediately expel a student who showed homosexual tendencies. They knew it was a danger, so they didn't take any chances with it. Liberalism eased that restriction, and once some got through the system they encouraged more, until they had created environments that in some cases were outright hostile to heteros. Again, see Rose's book to learn how a seminary could get the nickname "The Pink Palace."

Anonymous said...

"gays all try to look younger. They are even more obsessed with age then women and it defines the entire sexual pecking order. They are extremely concerned about their weight and they generally keep their hair short to minimize the effects of hair loss."


I've been struck by how some of them who work in suburbia go to their jobs looking rather like other males, then return home and change their appearance. I first saw this with a friend and colleague when I ran into him in SF. He was fully out of the closet at work, and we had socialized with him a great deal at afterwork group get-togethers for drinks so I was stunned when I saw him with eyes done up with mascara, eye liner, and eye shadow. "Rob, what the heck's up with this?" He sloughed it off with a laugh, then the following Monday at work sheepishly explained to me that lots of gay men "do that" when they go out to gay bars and such. A friend in the Dallas-Ft. Worth area tells me she's seen the same thing with the eye make-up from those gays with whom she works.

I admit to having been taken aback by it since my friend, while not the most masculine of guys, is not limp-wristed nor flaming either. Having seen him like that, however, I decided there's *a lot* I don't know.

Anonymous said...

Pat (Albertosaurus),

It seems I run into your comments here and elsewhere, and just recently you made clear on either this blog or another that you have a hunch, a favorite hypothesis, that T. gondii is the culprit, but you stressed that it is only a hunch.

In today's post above, however, you flat out state that the parasite is responsible for homosexuality: "Involvement with the hypothalamus leads to homosexuality."

And, "T. Gondii infection does more than just reverse the target. It brings about a host of changes in the limbic system. We see these changes in the spate of gay cannibals that have recently been in the news."

I have read a great deal about T. gondii, about the claims and the counterclaims, particularly about the claims that it is likely responsible for many cases of schizophrenia (and probably other mental illnesses), that it causes differing reactions in infected men versus infected women. However, I've never read that there's been a connection made between it and homosexuality.

Can you please cite the source(s) for your absolute statement that T. gondii does cause male homosexuality? I'd like to read it/them. If you only *think* it does, then state that.


Thanks.

Anonymous said...

You don't want a term that is too many words, or too polysyllabic, since that obscures what it means. And also invites whitewashers to turn it into a sterilized acronym.

In Britain the favoured (slang) term is nonce - look it up!

jody said...

jerry sandusky the pedophile is heading to trial. NOT A HOMOSEXUAL. NOT GAY. it's not jerry sandusky the homosexual heading to trial here, folks. it's just another pedophile. putting your penor up a 12 year old boy's bum does not make you a homosexual. deliberately choosing boys over girls, again and again, does not make you gay.

did you guys hear about the canadian cannibal? they call him the "psycho killer"! he's exciting and dangerous. the kind of sensational crime story the press thrives on. the news keeps making sure to tell us he's a porn star as well, to make the case as salicious as possible.

but...luka magnotta appeared exclusively in gay porn where he only had sex with other men. he killed his boyfriend, then raped his boyfriend's dead body on video. he cut off his boyfriend's hand then masturbated himself with it on video. however, he's not gay. he's not a homosexual. it's important that everybody understand this.

back in reality, i note how hard the media drives at us that "gay is good" but when somebody does something heinous and them being gay is a big part of what drove them to do it, their gayness is way, way irrelevant and NOT part of their quick, initial media profile.

Q said...

gays all try to look younger. They are even more obsessed with age then women and it defines the entire sexual pecking order. They are extremely concerned about their weight and they generally keep their hair short to minimize the effects of hair loss.



Sounds like we straight guys are damned if we do and damned if we don't. If we make an effort to watch our weight and dress nicely, we're gay in the eyes of other men, while if we don't, we're slovenly bums in the eyes of women.

I think I'll run the risk of being thought gay, if those are my options.

Anonymous said...

Reading the Times link and its comments, there are some people saying "but what about girls?"

A big difference is that teenage girls are very aware of and on the lookout for adult men trying to have their way with them. Their moms, the schools, the culture all warn them of this possibility and tell them what to do about it if it happens. But for a boy, having your football coach shove his hand down your pants must come completely out of the blue and they don't have the foggiest idea how to handle it.

jody said...

"Black men and women are also indistinguishable"

whoa there. other than north africans, most africans are pretty easy to distinguish, if for no other reason than their hair. african male hair barely grows and has a distinct appearance that every human notices, whereas african female hair grows pretty much like the other groups' hair and lengthens and flows. but an equally big difference is that african women tend to be very fat now, whereas most african men tend to be lean until age 50 or so. seems like the women are geared to metabolize food into fat quickly and put it on their bodies. the proverbial, baby got back.

east asians and southeast asians are very androgynous, i'd agree with that. asian men have the easiest transition from man to woman when becoming a tranny.

i guess the difference becomes greater the more cows the people eat. eating cow muscle and drinking cow milk makes you bigger, but it also makes you fatter. women's curves are built with fat. so in japan some of the women are looking more like women now than they did before. bigger boobs. that's happening in south korea too. although the koreans just seem to be slimmer in general and more athletic than the japense. so i guess mainly they're getting taller and not so much curvier.

in the other nations in asia where the people are poor and most of them are stuck on rice, grains, and vegetables for food, the sexes are still very andrygenous.

would be interesting to see if there is a big difference between chinese people outside of china, in taiwan and singapore, verus chinese people in china.

jody said...

" I was stunned when I saw him with eyes done up with mascara, eye liner, and eye shadow."

having known a good amount of gays, i can confirm lots of them do this. another one of the things which the television portrayal of gay men never shows.

when they feel comfortable around you, outside of normal mainstream society, a lot of them change significantly and show their true self. which often is some nearly flaming make up look taken straight out of a poison video from 1988. then they try to convince every guy that they're actually gay too, bash straights as "breeders", then go do their drugs and have sex with a random man they met this week. sorry, but you get STDs that way after a while, and the long term drug use where they "party and play" doesn't help either.

mel belli said...

"Leave now and you keep your retirement; fight it through the union and you risk losing your retirement, and the kids' parents will take this to the police."

A good story marred by the predictable shaky legal speculation by a non-lawyer. If this occurred in California (the Napa reference), it's exceedingly unlikely that the school district would be able to discipline the teacher on these facts, let alone threaten his pension rights. For those who don't know, for decades the California Teachers Association has worked hand-in-hand with powerful Dem legislators like Willie Brown, Mervyn Dymally and Art Agnos to render school districts nearly impotent to impose severe discipline. Under the group legal service plan, attorney fees are funded 100% for most terminations.

Anonymous said...

"I got quite an education: about 99% of the discussion I found was by homosexuals wishing to remove all their body hair."

1). It's a fad among the dating set of heteros as well as homos--includes both men and women. Yucky, yes, but even straight men are removing chest hair, pubic hair. It's very fem of them.

2) It might appeal to some gays to be hairless because some gays like looking fem. (Why the heck straight men do it is beyond me.)

Anonymous said...

My perspective. You guys are right that what is often being refered to as pedophilia simply is not. OTO homosexual activists might have a point when they maintain that actual pedophile homosexual men (the ones who really are interested in prepubescent boys) aren't particularly gay. In general they behave straight men and aren't interested in gay culture at all. Furthermore many of them are probably "homophobic" (i.e. put out by the effeminiate manner of many gay men). Anyway insisiting that homosexual pedophiles are gay simply because they are interested in boys is an unnuanced position. They're unquestionnably homosexual but not really gay.

Anonymous said...

"i note how hard the media drives at us that "gay is good" but when somebody does something heinous and them being gay is a big part of what drove them to do it, their gayness is way, way irrelevant and NOT part of their quick, initial media profile."

The media is full of dumb politically correct libs and gays so what do you expect?

alonzo portfolio said...

Hillary Swank on roids?

The acne makes absolutely no difference - that is one homely woman. If heretofore she's been considered attractive, I apologize, but I've actually never heard of her. Last movie I saw was "Waking Ned Devine."

Anonymous said...

Anyway insisiting that homosexual pedophiles are gay simply because they are interested in boys is an unnuanced position. They're unquestionnably homosexual but not really gay


The men molesting (and in some cases having sex) with teenage boys in the Horace Mann school were unquestionably homosexual men and not pedophiles.

Reading through the comments at the Times, I suppose it's inevitable that all the brainwashed liberals are eagerly exclaiming "They were pedophiles, not gay!"

No, the men in question were not pedophiles.

Anonymous said...

most african men tend to be lean until age 50 or so


Myth's Of The HBD-sphere, Episode 7.

Anonymous said...

"A good story marred by the predictable shaky legal speculation by a non-lawyer. If this occurred in California (the Napa reference), it's exceedingly unlikely that the school district would be able to discipline the teacher on these facts, let alone threaten his pension rights."

It's a true story, and yes, the principal was hoping that the offending teacher would be overwhelmed by fear and take the easy way out: avoid a police call, a face-to-face confrontation with angry parents, a possible civil case, a suspension with pay (and all the gossip that goes with it),and he was right. The teacher wilted quickly under pressure (and guilt, I assume) and retired.

We've had some other really dicey cases, one involving a straight, dopey teacher buying presents for and "dating" a student. (Arguments ensued about what constitued "dating."

At first it looked as if he would quit, but then he got union officials involved. The case made it to Sacto. and years later, he's still teaching. It's too bad on many levels, one being he's a really poor teacher.

secular study said...

at 6/7/12 2:21am is right: When heteros go after pubescent or very young women, it has entirely to do with reproduction and virginity --- and there are evolutionary explanations for this. When homos go after pubescent or very young men, it has entirely to do with sexual indulgence and psychological problems.

Does it really? I always thought it had more to do with the childlike look and sometimes size. It makes men feel more -- manly. Pubescent girls are not good reproducers. Fistula clinics are still are common in Africa, where those extremely desirable 13 yr olds are offered up as virgin brides on a routine basis, and sometimes end up leaking urine for the rest of their lives, shunned by everyone. Reproduction would have better waited. In fact, nature does know this and generally there is a blessed two to three years period of relative infertility between menarch and capacity for pregnancy. Is a very fertile, but ugly young 'un more desirable than a pretty, infertile one? Can you really tell? Are your reproductive urges that strong? Because if they are, why are most people, male and female, ready to stop after two kids. Why this hypocritical emphasis on potential fertility. It's hypocritical. People just tend to like young. Women like young men but are realistic about their chances, so don't cultivate the desire.
The best reproductive years for a female are perhaps about 19 to 26. Not 12 - 18.
As for sex with an older woman--at least she's a woman. Is a woman being a attracted to a man that doesn't have any more viable sperm (they do exist) also a pervert?
Sometimes sexual attraction has only the most remote and indirect connection with reproductive biology. In fact, one of the surprisnig things about HBD is the readiness of men to talk enthusiastically about reproduction capcity as a stimulating drive. In other venues men usally are lukewarm to the subject, but when they can connect getting turned on by a budding 12 yr old to legitimate reproductive, primal urges, then they're (some anyway) into it.
As for homos, they do things with each others' lower intestines. I can't see that as healthy for either homos or heteros.
Sometimes I think we just make up life as we go. If we can legitimize an urge that we know isn't wholesome (young people of both sexes really need to be left alone by older people of both sexes--there is a physical and mental quality that should not be sullied. We all know this. Even in the patriarchal Old Testment, one of the despicable sins is "lust in old men." Doubtless they included the old distaf (women) in that.

Anonymous said...

Re: Toxoplasmosis and homosexuality

Contrary to one repetitive poster's assertions, a history of toxoplasmosis exposure is NOT liked to homosexuality.

One large study done in the pre-HAART era of AIDS found that only 11% of gay men had, at the time they entered the study, been exposed to the parasite. Over the course of the study, another six percent of the study cohort showed serological evidence of exposure. (see footnote) In other words, 89% of self-identified gay men "became gay" without exposure to toxoplasmosis. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 1993 Apr;6(4):414-8. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8455146

This rate of exposure is lower than normal: "Seroprevalence varies substantially among different communities (e.g., approximately 15% in the United States and 50%-75% in certain European countries) [citations]" http://hivinsite.ucsf.edu/InSite?page=md-agl-toxo. In 2002, for example, researchers found that about fifteen percent of both HIV-positive and HIV-negative American women showed were seropositive for toxoplasmosis, indicating a past infection. A 2006 study found that 24.6% of Slovaks were showed evidence of exposure to the parasite. Eur J Intern Med. 2006 Nov;17(7):470-3. http://www.geburtshilfe.usz.ch/Documents/LehreUndForschung/Publikationen/benc_3.pdf

Not only is toxoplasmosis not linked to homosexuality, gay men are less likely to have been exposed to the parasite than heterosexuals.

_______________________________
(When someone is infected with toxo, their body generates antibodies to the parasite. Even after the infection is cleared from the bloodstream, either leaving the body or becoming a latent infection, the antibodies remain. The person is now deemed to be seropositive for toxoplamosis.

Seroprevalance is the percentage of a group who are seropositive.)

Anonymous said...

No, the men in question were not pedophiles.

You are missing my point. There are two types of homosexuals: the gay ones who are interested in youngish, but not prepubescent, males, and the pedophiles, who are actually are interested in prepubescent males. The gay homosexual very often speak in an affected manner, sometimes with a lisp, and have a delicate mincing walk. Most straight guys are put out by them. Why? Probably because the effeminacy signals cowardliness and dishonour at some subconcious level. (Homophobia isn't really due to the fact they like to get rogered by other guys.)
OTO, the pedophile homosexuals do not have an effeminate manner, do not evoke homophobia, and are psychologically identical to straight guys, except in one key area: Their idea of an ideal sexual partner happens to be a prepubescent boy.

Anonymous said...

I always thought it had more to do with the childlike look and sometimes size. It makes men feel more -- manly.


In the modern West at least, human females do not change dramatically in size and general appearance between 14 and 18. I saw a chart of height by age for boys and girls recently - girls tend to reach their maximum lifetime height (on average, five feet four inches) at about 13.

Anonymous said...

There are two types of homosexuals: the gay ones who are interested in youngish, but not prepubescent, males, and the pedophiles, who are actually are interested in prepubescent males. The gay homosexual very often speak in an affected manner, sometimes with a lisp, and have a delicate mincing walk.



OTO, the pedophile homosexuals do not have an effeminate manner, do not evoke homophobia, and are psychologically identical to straight guys, except in one key area: Their idea of an ideal sexual partner happens to be a prepubescent


There are some really stupid people saying some really stupid things about matters of they know nothing on this thread.

I know that Zachary Quinto is homosexual, and he obviously does not have a "delicate mincing walk" so therefore his ideal partner must be a prepubescent. Right? Right?

Anonymous said...

This is what's next: the head of major news media stating that the media is partisan and then proving it openly....

From Breitbart: Les Moonves, head of CBS attends HW fundraiser for Obama, given by LGBT supporters.
___________________________________


"CBS Chief Moonves Attends Obama Fundraiser, Outs Journalism as 'Partisan'"




by John Nolte7 hours ago120post a comment

"Last night in Los Angeles as our economy burned, President Barack Obama continued along his record-setting fundraising pace (events, not cash raised) with a stop among the glittery Top 1% at a LGBT fundraiser that included Ellen Degeneres, Cher, Chaz Bono, and CBS Corp. CEO and chairman Les Moonves. Part of what Moonves does is oversee the CBS News division, which makes the fact that he attended a political fundraiser fascinating, but not as fascinating as what he told The Los Angeles Times:


"CBS chief Les Moonves and his wife, Julie Chen, waited patiently for their wristbands. Obama, Moonves said, 'has shown great leadership' on the issue of gay marriage.

"Though he heads a news division, Moonves said, 'ultimately journalism has changed … partisanship is very much a part of journalism now.'

"He hastened to add that despite his presence, 'I run a news division. I've given no money to any candidate.'

"It's plausible Moonves could've attended this bigtime fundraiser as a guest, meaning someone else paid for his ticket so he could maintain that he has 'given no money to any candidate.' But what's the head of a major news division doing at this kind of partisan event to begin with? He certainly wasn't there to cover it for CBS. And what's he thinking publicly gushing over Obama's 'great leadership' on the divisive issue of same-sex marriage?

"Anyway, his statement about how 'partisanship is very much a part of journalism now' is not only interesting considering he said it at a Obama fundraiser, but it's also a falsehood.

"Partisanship has always been a part of journalism, especially at CBS News. It's just that the network always has and always will hide its partisanship behind a phony shield of objectivity and nonsense loopholes such as, 'I'm at this bigtime fundraiser but have never given money to any candidate.'

"But what Moonves is doing here is finally (and probably by accident) admitting that the media is partisan. It's also interesting that he's outing journalism in general, not just the openly partisan media that has blossomed online or on talk radio.

"He's calling 'journalism' partisan -- and indeed it is.

"So the only surprise is that someone with Moonves's status is finally admitting it.

"More irony: Moonves outing all of journalism at an LGBT event."

David said...

Vito Spatafore learned the hard way- gay and mafia don't mix.

walter condley said...

like to get rogered

In those porn interviews, do the girls ever say, "I'm here to get rogered"? or "I'd like a good rogering"? There don't seem to be any porn titles like, "Roger Wilgo" or "Roger and out."

pat said...

Can you please cite the source(s) for your absolute statement that T. gondii does cause male homosexuality? I'd like to read it/them. If you only *think* it does, then state that.

I think I've answered this before. I think that T. Gondii causes homosexuality. I got the idea for an infectious agent from Paul Ewald's writings and those of Greg Cochran. They arrived at their conclusion through logic. As have I.

There are not too many choices for a theory as to what causes homosexuality if you are going to operate with the modern scientific world view. For example you can't believe that being gay is the result of a direct divine intervention. Some gay activists think themselves lucky and that it proves that God loves them. Lots of bible thumpers think it proves just the opposite - God is punishing them.

If you are going to restrict yourself to naturalistic explanations you only have a few choices - genetic, infectious or chimeric.

If it were genetic it would be either a kind of aneuploidy or a point mutation. Aneuploidy can be seen under a microscope and it hasn't been seen. Point mutations are expressed at the mutation rate and homosexuality is just too frequent.

Chimeras like chromosome crossings just haven't been observed.

So gayness is almost certainly the result of an infection. We have good reason to know that homosexuality is present at birth. So it is very likely to be a disease of the mother.

It could be caused by a virus, a bacterium, a fungus or a parasite. As it happens parasites routinely modify the behavior of their hosts. There are a few fungi which parasitize insects and alter the bug's behavior. But in general bacteria and viruses don't operate by changing their host's behavior.

Many parasites do exactly that. The T. Gondii parasite invades the amygdala of the mouse and robs it of fear. The mouse now can still smell a cat's urine but it is no longer interpreted as a danger signal. Consequently the mouse gets eaten and the parasite continues its life cycle.

Sometimes the parasite gets into the wrong host - i.e. something other than a mouse. The California Sea Otter gets these parasites from sewage runoff into the rivers. It kills the otters.

Sometimes this parasite gets into humans. Indeed it is in the brains of millions of Americans. In humans it does not kill immediately the away it does in otters but it does change the host's behavior in a way similar to the way it is "supposed" to work in mice.

In humans T.Gondii causes schizophrenia. It also causes bad driving. I have hypothesized that it causes homosexuality. All the behavior changes in humans are relatively recent discoveries. We seem to have new finding ever year or two.

I believe this. Obviously I can be wrong. I would hope to be proven wrong. If T. Gondii isn't in fact the culpable agent, what is? It would have to be something else and eliminating T. Gondii would make that search easier.

I am a little disturbed that I keep getting this "argument from authority" objection. I made up this hypothesis from reading a number of publicly available books. Cochran and Ewald did much the same. I was going to originally write this theory up as a book. I guess that I'll have to do that. I had hoped that I could just blog my hypothesis around the Web and then someone with more resources would test it. But it seems that I need to cite a book even if I have to write the book myself.

I keep tracing out my logic but I never get logical (or empirical) objections. People react as if I didn't get my guru license before I dared to think. I get comments like this one from people who act as if I'm reporting on a Bigfoot or UFO sighting.

Albertosaurus

comment said...

I wonder about the IQ's of pedophiles. There was a study of incarcerated men that found a negative correlation between phallometrically measured sexual interest in children and males (the younger and more male the kids in the pictures these men liked the, the lower the IQ of the man on average) and researchers concluded that pedophilia might be caused by some kind of developmental brain damage (pedophiles also tend to be an inch shorter suggesting developmental stunting or bad genes)

On the other hand many allegedly gay or allegedly gay pedophile men throughout history have been creative geniuses. Michael Jackson is the larger than life prototype.

Interestingly he had many older brothers (a known prenatal risk factor for both homosexuality and homosexual pedophilia)

I wonder if pedophiles might be like left-handers, where the brain gets rewired causing more cognitive diversity (more people at both extremes of the IQ bell curve). Pedophiles are more likely to be left-handed.

Anonymous said...

Jeeeeeeez, Pat, I said I knew that in the past you had said T. gondii was your fav hypothesis, but for heaven's sake, go back and look at your post on this thread, the one I quoted. You don't present it as simply an explanation that makes sense. You flat out state that it causes homosexuality, leading a reader to think either, "Oh, what a crackpot this guy is--he's the only guy in the world that knows not just the general cause of homosex (pathogen), but the specific cause (T. gondii)," OR you lead a reader to think, "Wow, guess researchers announced this--that they've found the cause, the *specific cause,* of
homosexuality; did I forget to read the news that week or are the media simply not reporting the finding?"

Anonymous said...

Pat, let me simplify what I said: I have no problem with your hypothesis, only a problem with your careless, misleading use of language-- your stating of your hypothesis as fact.

Anonymous said...

The homosexual = good people and homosexual = bad people should be forced onto a large island to alternately kill each other or work out their repressed feelings.

Anonymous said...

"Horace Mann School: Pedophilia or Homosexual Harassment?"

The answer is "chomosexual abuse".

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Chomo

Anonymous said...

Pedophilia or Homosexual Harassment?

His-ass-ment?

Anonymous said...

"I was going to originally write this theory up as a book. I guess that I'll have to do that."

Suggestion: Contact Charles Roselli, the sheep expert.

Sheep are infected by the parasite too. Ask Roselli, expert in the sexual differentiation of the sheep brain, and one who has been searching for the cause of why so many rams are exclusively male-oriented, if he has entertained the notion of a pathogen or the parasite specifically.


http://www.ohsu.edu/xd/education/schools/school-of-medicine/departments/basic-science-departments/physpharm/faculty-staff/roselli.cfm

Anonymous said...

gays often use free drugs and beer to lure in prey. One tried to "smoke up" with me and my friend and we just walked away. But it is no wonder homosexuals are often seen by the less PC arabs as sneaky and tricky types.

SharonKass said...

o All homosexual feelings are abnormal and compulsive. See "Fathers of Homosexual Males" and "The Meaning of Same-Sex Attraction," by Joseph Nicolosi, at www.narth.com.

o Attraction to "Twinkies"--young, tender-looking boys--is well known in the gay male world. This attraction is born of a combination of the urge to take advantage of a weaker partner and the projection of the early unmet need for male attention. These men really believe they are doing these boys a kindness.