NAMBLA's Internet Forum

NAMBLA's
            Internet Forum

In ancient Rome, the Forum was where people often gathered to discuss philosophy and politics.

With this forum we hope to present ideas that viewers to our Web site wish to contribute. Even ideas contrary to our  views will be considered as long as opinions are presented courteously and in understandable English. We reserve the right to correct spelling and minor errors without altering meanings.

None of the arguments presented in this forum should be assumed to be in line with NAMBLA's policies. They may or may not be. The purpose is the creation of a series of debates that may ultimately distill unassailable truths. We encourage readers, even when they agree with an opinion, to find flaws in logic or fact that the writer did not see. This is the best way of arriving at sound conclusions.

Contributors are free to identify themselves by any actual name or alias they choose. Send your thoughts to:       info@nambla.org
To facilitate discussion, the following submission was condensed from the original. For the full submission, pleas click here.

A False Sense of Morality  

by Charles Lee Lamadrid Blake

A recent article which appeared at slate.com was entitled, “Why Republicans have become obsessed with accusing their opponents of pedophilia.” In the fourth paragraph, the article’s author states, “There are a few reasons why pedophilia is the accusation of choice: It is probably the easiest to understand, the least defensible allegations available to them, and it's one of the few moral high grounds they believe they have left to claim.  Invented pedophilia allegations are an appealing ploy for a party whose identity remains wrapped in family-values rhetoric even as its efforts to camouflage its hollow moral center peter out.”

As minor-attracted people, we must try not to get swept up in all the controversy surrounding our feelings for children. When we come to understand that children having sexual feelings for adults and adults having sexual feelings for children are normal and in harmony with nature, we can begin to deconstruct this battlefield our society has created.

Note how the article’s author blindly asserts with absolute confidence that “pedophilia” is a behavior that cannot be defended, that sex with children is indefensible. But isn’t it just the opposite? Isn’t sexual intimacy a good thing? And if sexual enjoyment is good for adults, wouldn’t it also be good for children?

When we begin to examine more closely the inferences that sexual abuse theorists make about sex in general, we begin to understand just what a bad rap sexual intimacy is getting. Isn’t our ability to express physical love with one another wondrous? Isn’t it awe-inspiring to think that humans evolved beyond apes and chimpanzees over millions of years with an innate capacity to bond sexually and love one another? Aren’t the professional victimologists really just vilifying a part of human behavior that should be celebrated?

But what do we see when we look at the cheap tawdry circus surrounding all these accusations of “pedophilia” in the media?  We see those who aren’t ruled by reason but by powerful emotions.

 So when we see American society swept up in obsessive hysteria over adult–child sexuality, we should try our best to detach ourselves from the controversy over something as wholesome and beneficial as intergenerational sex can and should be. We see it correctly. They do not.

 Throughout human history, societies have frequently been wrong about commonly-held beliefs. In some ways, we’re better off than we were during former times. In other ways, things are worse. Progress is seldom linear. In the second half of the 20th century, American society took a giant step backwards when it began to reverse a historical tolerance for adult-child sex.

When we read this article about Republicans and Democrats, we see that all they’re really doing is fighting over who is the most moral.

As minor-attracted people, we should not allow ourselves to internalize the feelings that others have for us. The most devastating assumption that we can make is that those who dehumanize us are right and to allow them to define who we are. This self-hatred turned inward can destroy us. Turned outward, it destroys the quality of many lives. Against all odds, we must try somehow to keep our own narratives alive and well. This article is dedicated to all those who have tragically believed those whose opinion of them as being less than worthless.

As minor–attracted people, we should try our best not to allow ourselves to fall victims to the savage and senseless mischaracterizations of our innocent nature. We should guard against anything judgmental and something [as] knee-jerk morality. As the article said, their moral center is hollow and empty. We must move forward with humility, grace under fire, and dignity.

In order just to “feel” like moral beings, many have to point the finger at innocent victims. Arbitrarily judging others requires no thought and, thus, no effort, but taking the time to look at issues from many different angles and make informed decisions requires rigorous thought and a commitment that most people of the not so moral majority are unable or unwilling to make. Truly moral people don’t need to puff themselves up at the expense of others. They don’t feel like their light shines brighter when ours is dimmer.

The entire way of thinking that involves looking down on minor-attracted people is nothing but self-righteousness. It is sanctimonious and self-serving – not borne of generosity but utter conceit and selfishness. We see this when we’re mobbed online or when we’re attacked in the real world by those who are conveniently setting themselves up to be the “good guys” at our expense.

This false morality is built on powerful, negative emotions. As we know, human emotions and their intensity can change like the wind. This is why mobs like the one I experienced on Twitter are so unstable. At an individual level, this is nothing short of emotional instability. Reasoning objectively using sound logic offers us a better way.

When we stop to think about the negative consequences of running off of sheer emotions, we can see that emotions are more readily influenced than objective thinking. With the circus we see in the media, it’s good to remain as objective as possible. Otherwise, we may find our emotions being played upon to unduly influence us instead of informing us, and any vibrant democracy relies on the decision-making capacity of a well-informed electorate.

When we begin to see that all of these manifestations as just symptoms of a disturbed society, maybe we will begin to have more compassion for ourselves when we are marginalized and murdered for something that is completely natural and has protective benefits for all of humanity. After all, love for others begins with a healthy love for oneself.