‘Paedophilia is natural and normal for males’ – Here’s Why We Need to Stop Calling Child Rapists Paedophiles

A006 - CopyThe word paedophilia originates from the Greek words paidos, meaning child, and philia, meaning love. The term is derived from a pseudo-scientific justification for the behaviour of those who would molest, abuse, rape and even kill children to satiate personal desires.  It absolves them of responsibility. We need to call a spade a spade: these people are child abusers and rapists.

The Paedophile Information Exchange Lives On

A008

The first scientist to use the concept was the German sexologist and physician Richard Krafft-Ebing. In his monograph Psychopatia Sexualis, published in 1886, he defined pedophilia as a psychosexual perversion, open to cure. Around 1906, his British counterpart Havelock Ellis presented pedophilia as an extreme version of normal masculine sexuality.

In 1974, a group of child sex abusers launched the Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE).  This group was legal at the time, and sought to promote the rights of ‘paedophiles’.  The group harnessed the science of Kraft-Ebing and Ellis and espoused the view that children had the right to indulge in their sexual feelings with adults, and argued the age of consent should be lowered to four years old, or abolished altogether.

This was not some fringe group, hidden away.  They had thousands of members, many from senior positions in the media, the security services, politics and other establishment positions.

The members were public and built affiliations with the Gay Liberation Front, the Campaign for Homosexual Equality, mental health charity Mind, and even human rights organisation Liberty (previously named The National Council for Civil Liberties).  The leaders of PIE shared platforms with Harriet Harman, Patricia Hewitt, and others.

But such conversations still exist in our society.

As Andrew Gilligan reports in the Telegraph today:

“Paedophilic interest is natural and normal for human males,” said the presentation. “At least a sizeable minority of normal males would like to have sex with children … Normal males are aroused by children.”

Some yellowing tract from the Seventies or early Eighties, era of abusive celebrities and the infamous PIE, the Paedophile Information Exchange? No. Anonymous commenters on some underground website? No again.

The statement that paedophilia is “natural and normal” was made not three decades ago but last July. It was made not in private but as one of the central claims of an academic presentation delivered, at the invitation of the organisers, to many of the key experts in the field at a conference held by the University of Cambridge.

It’s Time to Stop

EG3By continuing to refer to child abusers and rapists as ‘paedophiles’, we unwittingly endorse the view that such a thing even exists.  That these (mostly) men are victims of their own broken biology.

No.

The plight of one particular boy illustrates the nature of abuse meted out at the Elm Guest House, the alleged centre of the Westminster Child Sex Abuse scandal. This has nothing to do with love.

Peter Hatton-Bornshin (pictured above)) and his brother David were put into care after their mother committed suicide in the 1970’s.  They were 12 and 13.  One day, they were told by senior workers at Grafton Close Children’s Home that they were going ‘a treat’.  Their treat was a visit to Elm Guest House.

Peter, his brother and other boys were made to dress up as fairies, encouraged to become drunk, and invited to play a game of hide and seek.  The boys were told to hide, and when caught by the adult men, would be sexually abused by their captor.  Some of the men who raped, tortured and sexually abused Peter and David have been named as Liberal MP Cyril Smith, Catholic Priest Father Tony McSweeney (who officiated at the wedding of Frank Bruno), and Deputy Manager of Grafton Close Children’s Home John Stingemore (who also supplied the boys).

Peter never got over the abuse he received at the hands of these men.  He later complained about his treatment and received compensation from Richmond Council, while the story remained suppressed.  He fell into poor mental health, and was treated at Broadmoor.  In 1994, just days after his 28th birthday, he killed himself with a fatal drug overdose.  His suicide note included the words “I will get those bastards.”

While the allegations are described as ‘historic’, they have remained with those on whom they were perpetrated to this day.  Meanwhile, the men involved at the time, such as convicted child abuser and former PIE leader Tom O’Carroll are attending Cambridge debates seeking to legitimize their abuse.

“Wonderful!” he wrote on his blog afterwards. “It was a rare few days when I could feel relatively popular!”

Enough.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Scriptonite Daily is a citizen funded news site. If we want to make an alternative media, then we need to build it. Your donations make the difference.

Become a regular subscriber here

Payment Options


Make a one off donation here


55 thoughts on “‘Paedophilia is natural and normal for males’ – Here’s Why We Need to Stop Calling Child Rapists Paedophiles

  1. If peadophillia is ever excused for like some of these articles are trying to say then the world is wrong. There’s is no excuse to do that to a helpless child not ever. We have to protect the kids at all costs and the only way to do this is maybe to put all peados straight on death row after one offence. Children must be protected at all costs!!!!!!

  2. “Pedophile” doesn’t necessarily mean “child molester”, it simply means attracted to children, and not all pedophiles molest children or watch child pornography.

    • I think minor-attracted person is a more appropriate term, because not all pedophiles rape children or watch child pornography

      • Allow me to apologize, instead of the apologist you’re actually a pedophile/child rapist. Go away, no one’s trying to hear you.

  3. Words can change their meaning

    Paedophile is a dirty word these days. We haven’t condoned them by using it, we’ve snatched their name from under their noses

    They used to be able to call themselves paedophiles, but they can’t now. This is because people have used it

  4. Thanks Kerry fired up for work now! These people will skew and twist anything to justify their behaviour (and thoughts) towards children to overcome the ‘social inhibitors’. They have to do this to convince themselves they are not doing anything wrong and they are not a bad person. It’s the only way they can live with themselves.
    But they are evil men and women.

  5. If they can’t help having feelings for children, then wouldn’t it be better for children if the paedophiles were allowed to be open to have counselling before they go on to harm a child?

  6. A while ago there was a documentary on BBC2 called “The Hunt For Britain’s Paedophiles.” I can’t recall now if the statement was made as part of that programme or one associated with it, but I DO recall that the person interviewed was in some way connected with Cambridge U. He stated that it is perfectly normal for a man to be sexually attracted to a peri-pubescent female – something to do with our evolution having hard-wired into us the need to seek the youngest and (presumably) fittest mates to bear young. Whether there’s anything to that, I don’t know as I’m no academic or medical/psychology practitioner. Personally I found the statement, and the thinking behind it, creepy in the extreme.

    Two other points of interest came out of that documentary, in my view: One was that if a man was to confide to his GP that he felt sexually attracted to children, his GP would be legally obliged to report that confession to the police. The other was that such people could seek help via the Probation Service. I think it is fair to say that, in view of the hostility that meets the “outing” of a paederast or paedophile, those of this deviant behaviour are never likely to make use of either avenue because they won’t wish to end up on an official register somewhere. Thus, the System itself must shoulder a certain amount of the blame for effectively “hiding” these people until they are exposed as offenders.

    Maybe if there was something along the lines of the Samaritans – private, confidential and not connected to the legal services, and with the ability to refer people to whatever counselling/medicated assistance would prevent them offending, more of those who are of this nature would be encouraged and emboldened to seek help before they step over the line and actually offend.

    • @ Darren “something to do with our evolution having hard-wired into us the need to seek the youngest and (presumably) fittest mates to bear young”

      That’s partly true, and perhaps explains those who find (say) 15 year old girls more attractive than fully mature women. However, paedophilia (and I’m with those who say the word’s already been taken back by the non-abusive majority) – anyway, paedophilia is a deeper seated aberration, quite simply because it requires the lack of another evolved ‘drive’ found in normal individuals, That drive is a filter for the young=fit thing, put simply, ‘prepubescent = unfit mate’ and it’s the reason normal (‘healthy’) humans feel no sexual urge toward children; on an evolutionary level, mating with a prepubescent is a total waste of energy – there’s no chance whatsoever of offspring.

      I see the legal definition of paedophilia as breaking down into two dysfunctions, there’s a sexual preference for teenagers which I see as a character flaw on the same lines as any perverse power seeking; alternately there’s what I call ‘true’ paedophilia which I see as a personality disorder, on similar lines to Munchausen’s by proxy.

      The only reason I’m content to give them the supposed ‘get out’ of calling it a personality disorder is that a personality disorder is regarded as essentially untreatable, and untreatable dangerous patients aren’t sentenced to fixed terms of imprisonment, they’re generally locked up until they’re no longer dangerous.

  7. So, according to some academic presentation, ‘Paedophilia is natural and normal for males’ – is it now? Is it ‘natural and normal’ for children, too? Or is what they think of no consequence? Bit like saying ‘Rape is natural and normal for males’ – so that’s ok then.

    • I am still under the age of 18, I chose since the age of 11, to have a relationship both physical and emotional with a male friend who was at that time 42 years of age. We are still together, unbeknown to anyone else, my father would kill me (he considers homosexuals to be filthy vermin) and my friend if it was known. The moment I become 18 years of age our relationship will become, in most countries, completely legal and my friend and I would be classed as consenting Homosexuals and not as “paedophile” and “victim”. I can see no reason why a sexual relationship, between a boy, who can feel sexual pleasure and an adult should be made illegal, upon the condition that both are completely consenting.

      There are no more rapists amongst “paedophiles” than there are amongst heterosexuals or homosexuals. A man who prefers to have a sexual relation with a boy, is no more a Rapist than a man who prefers to have sexual relations with a woman or other man. Rape is evil, all relations should be 100% consenting.

  8. saying that the P word is not the same as child abuse is like saying eating babies is not the same as cannibalism Get a grip Yes I agree that some people are that way inclined. That does not make it right. It is wrong to murder, just because I feel to murder someone does not make me right to do so. For a nation that has so much to say about how other countries control their affairs, it is about time that the dirty under belly of this society stands up and be counted amount the most primitive savage and deceitful set of people on earth. Sorry these comments are meant for the hypocrites, I am so upset

  9. Why are you all arguing? We should be standing together to fight for the protection of our innocent children against these evil men and women. It terrifies me that there are people out there that actually want to lower or get rid of the age of consent. I would not be responsible if anyone hurt my kids

    • “Standing together” is exactly what we ARE doing, by not allowing those who would put their own petty grievances before victims of abuse -which is the subject of this post; NOT ‘men’s rights’.

      .

    • It is discussing and frightening to see “certain people” writing about this very, very SAD topic.
      To me it is Black or White.
      Any one remotely sympathizing with anything in relation to “Pedophiles” or trying to bend itself like a worm on a fishing-hook in a pity attempt to justify its OWN feelings or ACTIONS of Dark Evil thoughts.

    • This is the ‘party line’ of paedophiles, and it is very difficult for a non paedophile to believe this. For a start ANY access of child porn IS child abuse – ANYONE who does that (apart from law enforcement obviously) is participating in the sexual abuse of children. I have not yet heard of a paedophile denying that they have accessed child porn. I have heard of men accessing child porn but denying that they are paedophiles though!

      I am sure that there are a TINY proportion of people sexually attracted to children who exercise great self control, and understand exactly how harmful their desires would be if acted upon. But TINY, I don’t know how tiny, but I would guess at much less than 10%.

      From the reading I have done the most common paedophile is a man who justifies his actions in some way. Just like any sexual predator in fact. They use grooming techniques, not force, they romanticise what they are doing with references to Lewis Carroll or Lolita. They can say ‘I have never hurt a child’ and believe it because they have convinced themselves that if they do not rape, digitally or orally penetrate, they have not hurt the child. Masturbating in front of a child IS harmful. Sitting a child on your lap for your sexual gratification IS harmful. Accessing child porn IS harmful.

      Please stop with the apologist crap. I hope that that young man can be helped, but apologists probably cannot be.

      • Yes! Your comments sound wise! There are a number of people that have sexual “thoughts” about children! As long as those “thoughts” remain thoughts and are seen by the people who have these urges only as that!…. thoughts……then that will be ok! As long as those thought are let go of and don’t become actions! That is the important thing!

    • Look, being attracted to children is wrong. Pedos are delusional and a mistake. Having sex with kids is wrong, being attracted to kids is wrong, making/watching child porn is wrong, etc. All this is just to “excuse” what they do. I read the blogs of pedos even the “good” ones are a threat to kids and dangerous in our society.

  10. this is the first time I have written or let anyone really into my memories
    I ran away when I was 14 in 1968 and ended up on the “meatrack” at Picadilly Circus where as a heroin addicted pre-pubescent I was very popular with the punters….I was put in Ashford Remand Centre, various other establishments and eventually Feltham Psychiatric Borstal from where I eventually escaped and went on the run….straight back to the Dilly
    I have endured serious mental health issues all my life and only ended my homelessness when I was 50….now that the history is coming to light I am finding it difficult to sleep at night and my “panic-attacks” grow daily worse…memories of Playland and The Bishop of Medway come flooding back….I never thought I would type these words let alone to a public forum, but the current hysteria in the media is very painful for me and I imagine many other victims

    • Please take some comfort, if you can, in the fact that there are many people who may not have shared your experiences, but know only too well how easy it was for perverts to destroy children’s lives. You may not have seen justice done, but there are so many of us who can empathise with your pain. My brother is a class A addict due to sexual abuse in childhood and it is the surest way, without a doubt, to ruin a childhood, and future mental health. I am so, so sorry.

    • Thankyou Johnny, for putting into words what you have been through, and letting people know how this will effect innocent young lives. Your bravery is helping to end this, making people aware and bringing to light how young lives can be ruined by it.I want to acknowledge you for your courage, let you know that there are those of us that were in similar circumstances – I also left home as a 16 year old and was considered fair game by these people but by the grace of God managed to avoid the worst of it – and request that you forgive yourself the desperate decisions you had to make as a vulnerable child in order to survive as best you could.Bringing out painful memories is not easy, and with the help of your GP and counselling you will heal those wounds with understanding and find peace in your life that you so richly deserve. If at any point you feel strong enough, there are other young people coming through the same thing that can be benefited by a man of your experience and understanding. As these matters are in the media, I understand the discomfort it will cause yourself and other victims, the good thing is we are moving to a place in society where many who did not know are waking up, the perpetrators can be brought to justice, and vulnerable young people will be protected. I am grateful that you shared this, I wish you all the best in your life from now on Johnny.

      • thank you Dave for your kind and considerate words, and yes, upon reflection it is good that this is coming to light and the perpetrators are being brought to justice…I have watched over the years as some have gone to their grave without the public being aware of their monsterous acts and I have wrestled with the dilemma as to whether I should “name names”….and I know many will argue that they must be “outed”, but some of these people have families who may have had no knowledge of their actions? these innocent peoples lives could also be destroyed if the truth came out….my grandfather was abusing my mum when she was seven years old…both are now dead, but her brothers and sisters are not and they have children and grandchildren…I do not feel II can destroy their lives by revealing all.
        thank you again
        love life and unity
        johnny

  11. I feel rather miffed that you regard Paedophilia as a solely male only province. I grant you it is more common & prevalent in the UK with males in high ,middle & lower rungs of societies ladder.Particularly in Westminster, but that is not their sole province as they operate internationally. You obviously view yourself a serious feminist journalist which I have no problems with. I do think you should do more research & history on the subject on such a serious topic. I realise you focusing on Parliament & their Pie associates. However I would be very surprised to see any women prosecuted connected with the Westminster male Pie Club. There maybe similar claims from the Mail or Sun blubbering on continuously about women they have already named in late 70’s or early 80’s as a smear campaigning, possibly created by Pie members as diversionary tactics.
    Overall I am very sceptical on the ousting of 20 male pie club parliamentarians & civil servants being prosecuted & gaoled . As there could be as many as 120 scarred rabbits or more judging by the exceptionally low turn out at PM’s question time today.
    Paedophilia is more of a national & international sexual deviation but peculiarly prevalent in the UK. Hence the demand for the trafficking of children. The most sinister of these being the snuff clubs.
    I have one or two other ideas on the subject should you be interested.

  12. Pingback: 'Paedophilia is natural and normal for males' -...

  13. Not really – most people who use the term are not scholars of the Ancient Greek language. ‘Paedo’ or ‘paedophile’ is now an offensive term of abuse, even if the person who uses it doesn’t know its origin or what it really means. It has largely replaced the term ‘pederast’.

    • How is this helpful? Female paedophiles are maybe 5% of all paedophiles (hard to know, obviously, but equally obviously it is a VERY small proportion). Most women involved in the sexual exploitation of children are ‘inducted’ through a man. It is not ‘man hating’ to state the facts. I would not be offended by someone stating a clear fact about women – even if it was unpleasant (I do not feel I am at one with ALL women!). If it is a reality I just have to bloody accept it!

  14. Paedophilia is something that exists. You can’t airbrush it out of the way. I agree that you have to draw a line and thus it’s worth pointing out again that _Not all paeophiles abuse children_ – People who are sexually attracted to children can and should seek help before they turn into abuses. There is biology involved in such lust.

    It is tres important to direct your anger at the people committed the crimes against the children and not those who have the twisted biology but don’t go out and offend.

  15. It’s inaccurate anyway, as the Greek word “philos” refers to non-sexual love. The term is typical of the lazy English tendency to use “phile” as an ending for enthusiasm of any kind. Is “paedo” even Greek, or is it Latin?

  16. The main caption of this item calls all men Paedophiles, which I take exception to. Paedophilia is also carried out by women; it is a sick and perverse attitude of a minority who think that they can do as they please.

    • Keith this particular article is about men doing it though and it isn’t that uncommon, what do you have to say about that? Why try and absolve male behaviour and bring women into it? I take exception to that!

    • Why can’t you just read the whole thing before the knee jerk reaction?! It isn’t Scriptonites fault that a PAEDOPHILE has decided that ALL men are attracted to children! Take it up with him why don’t you!

Leave a Reply