Posted on 06/04/2003 11:12:28 AM PDT by Notwithstanding
Pedophilia Chic" Reconsidered (The taboo against sex with children continues to erode)
"... Four-plus years and many other challenges to the same taboo later, it is clear that this hypothesis got something wrong. For one thing, no sustained public challenges have arisen over other primal taboos. Even more telling, if nihilism and nihilism alone were the explanation for public attempts to legitimize sex with boy children, then we would expect the appearance of related attempts to legitimize sex with girl children; and these we manifestly do not see. Nobody, but nobody, has been allowed to make the case for girl pedophilia with the backing of any reputable institution. Publishing houses are not putting out acclaimed anthologies and works of fiction that include excerpts of men having sex with young girls. Psychologists and psychiatrists are not competing with each other to publish studies demonstrating that the sexual abuse of girls is inconsequential; or, indeed, that it ought not even be defined as "abuse."
Two examples from the last few weeks will suffice to show the double standard here. In the November 12 New York Times Book Review, a writer found it unremarkable to observe of his subject, biographer Gavin Lambert, that when "Lambert was a schoolboy of 11, a teacher initiated him [into homosexuality], and he 'felt no shame or fear, only gratitude.'" It is unimaginable that New York Times editors would allow a reviewer to describe an 11-year-old girl being sexually "initiated" by any adult (in that case, "initiation" would be called "sexual abuse"). Similarly, in mid-December the New York Times Magazine delivered a cover piece about gay teenagers in cyberspace which was so blasé about the older men who seek out boys in chat rooms that it dismissed those potential predators as mere "oldies." Again, one can only imagine the public outcry had the same magazine published a story taking the same so-what approach to online solicitation, off-line trysts, and pornography "sharing" between anonymous men and underage girls.
No: As was true four years ago, contemporary efforts to rationalize, legitimize, and justify pedophilia are about boys. Forget about abstractions like nihilism; what the record shows is something more prosaic. The reason why the public is being urged to reconsider boy pedophilia is that this "question," settled though it may be in the opinions and laws of the rest of the country, is demonstrably not yet settled within certain parts of the gay rights movement.
During the campaign, one of the profs at Ave Law school put a petition together and went before Cardinal Maida to ask if there was anything he could do. It was pretty obvious from the start that Granholm wasn't Catholic.
Unfortunately, Curia policy is not to interfere in local politics. Maida did nothing.
We're pretty aware that although she lectors in a supposedly Catholic Church, Granholm does not follow the teaching of the Magesterium.
I asked her about why she hasn't been Excommunicated, and am still waiting for her response. Not being a Catholic, I'm glad I've got a good source to consult on this.
Unfortunately, the Curia seldom looks at anything but the big picture.
Their logic is that Michigan is small potatoes compared to the persecutions going on in China and Africa.
They took a similar stance with the child-molestation cases in Boston. They want the local bishops to hash it out. Unfortunately, in the Arch-diocese of Detroit, the local active bishop is Gumbleton, who is pretty useless. Gumbleton is a holdover from Paul VI days. Paul VI was pretty notorious for assigning bishops on recommendations from dubious sources. It's the orthodox catholics lack of faith in Gumbleton that drove the law school prof to try Maida.
But have no fear - things are slowly changing. When I was in Rome last month, I met one of the Msgrs on the committee for selecting bishops for the English-speaking world. He is incredibly solid and working toward getting orthodox bishops in charge. Right now, we have to deal with the holdovers, who are slowly retiring.
Hope springs eternal.
I'm still waiting for somebody to proclaim a "Pride Day" for circus freaks...
**********************************
Now, now. You mustn't call them "circus freaks" anymore ! Tia
You mustn't call them circus freaks any more!
Those are "Differently Abled Performance Artists"!
tia
Live with it. You voted this dumb b!tch in, live with the results.
The "Union vote"...Oy vey...
It isn't about "identity" it's only about behavior. Twisted, degenerate, depraved, and bestial behavior at that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.