Pizzagate. Plus, Ex-FBI Undercover Agent Bob Hamer |357|

Discussion in 'Skeptiko Shows' started by Alex, Aug 8, 2017.

  1. Laird

    Laird Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2015
    Messages:
    1,355
    Some fair comments, Mishelle. For me, the style of the article mirrors that of many other such journalistic pieces in the same genre, and simply reflects good writing - for which its author deservedly was nominated for an award. Yes, fair point, looking at child porn is in some sense (especially legal/moral) "offending". And I noticed the same apparent contradiction that you mention too - it would be interesting to put it to Elizabeth and see how she responded. Perhaps she'd say that the few who don't grow out of it are those who can be prevented from continuing. I wonder too exactly what percentage of potential offenders develop their urges later on in life - I haven't looked into the stats at all so don't know much about under-reporting. Yes, perhaps her thinking is wishful, but it is at least worth trialling; I give her kudos for exploring a new possibility.
     
  2. AryaS

    AryaS Member

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2017
    Messages:
    220
    Laird,
    I really appreciate that you spent the time to watch the Dr. Handrahand interview -- and then went through the court case documents, etc. But I have to respond that I think you are again getting duped into feeling sympathy for people who are literally raping and sexually assaulting little children -- or supporting this abuse through the watching of "hard core child pornography." I watched half of the TedTalk, couldn't take any more of her NLP advocacy for "adolescent offenders," and I remain certain that the Luke Malone article -- AND this TedTalk -- are part of an agenda to turn a criminal pathology into a disability (or a "public health problem" as she puts it), with the end result being that pedophiles are are given full protected class status.

    When I read the article you linked, I also looked up LaTourneau to see if she was real (in part because her name is the last name of a very well known female pedophile in the United States -- Mary Kay LaTourneau -- a teacher who raped and then later married her student -- and I felt this, too, might be some kind of inside baseball reference). But being "real" and even being part of academia doesn't mean that Ms. LaTourneau isn't part of a concerted effort to normalize pedophilia. What better way to get this "normalized" than to have a seemingly credible person like this making the rounds and framing the issue as one deserving of sympathy for the offenders rather than the victims? You yourself note that the Handrahand interview speaks to this -- to people taking positions where they can ensure a supply line of child victims or who take positions so they can protect others of their ilk. And I am sure you have read the news lately, which reveals that seemingly caring leaders of organizations meant to address/stop child sexual abuse are actually guilty of that very abuse themselves. See my links in previous posts above about the deputy minister of education in Canada (a person charged with writing the sex education manuals for the public schools involved in dark web sadistic child rape websites) -- or the recent links about Oxfam/Save the Children leadership (see in particular the article about UNICEF anti-sex abuse campaigner Peter Newell). Putting the very people who commit the crimes into positions to commit the crimes or effect policy/protect the abusers seems to be standard operating procedure. So I would at the very least use caution before giving credence to this woman and her dubious "research" results.

    Personally, my "disinformation" alarm was going off full bore when she said that half of the pedophiles in the world are 14 and under and that they have a 97-98% non-recidivism rate. Seriously? That just does not align with the thousands of accounts I have read about childhood sexual abuse -- or the fifty of so stories I have personally heard by friends, family, and acquaintances. It does not align with my own experiences either -- and I have worked in child dependency, where the majority of childhood sexual abuse is perpetuated on the children by adult males -- fathers, uncles, and stepfathers -- not 14 year olds and unders (though it does happen, usually in families where the 14 year olds were abused themselves by their fathers, stepfathers, uncles, or other trusted adult associates). How can such a claim even be made? How is this data collected? Do pedophiles (including the elite engaged in systemic trafficking) check in and report on their pedo status? Or are we talking about only those who are caught and prosecuted? Repeating this pack of lies over and over again to the population will do nothing but harm the victims -- the children.

    I would urge you to go back with new eyes and re-read Luke Malone's "masters thesis" and ask yourself if this reads like a masters thesis or a fictional narrative intended to elicit sympathy for child rapists. I would ask yourself to really consider the remote possibility of this one piece of choice bullshit being true: "during the two years he had been watching hard core pre-teen porn, it all suggested that the kids liked it." Two years of watching hard-core pre-teen porn -- images so violent and disturbing that no normal person viewing it could escape unscathed -- yet all the images suggested that pre-verbal children liked it? Do you really think he watched two years of this, saw only rainbows and unicorns and happy couplings of adults and pre-verbal children, oblivious to the child's terror, pain, and non-consent? So if that cannot be true -- what else is a fabrication there? What conclusions do these authors want you to reach?
     
    Last edited: Feb 18, 2018
    hypermagda and Mishelle like this.
  3. Mishelle

    Mishelle Member

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2017
    Messages:
    215
    Home Page:
    Arya, I'm appreciating so much your passion, but especially your research in this arena, and you inspire me to get more educated.

    So today I discussed with my sister at length this topic. She is a psychology professor and is fully immersed in the system while getting a good dose of reality outside of it, thanks to mostly me and her hubby, and maybe naturally not being a total tool despite her deep desire to remain comfortable and protected, as any rational woman (any being) is normally inclined. :)

    She did say the one thing that has made me think and pause in this discussion so far on behalf of the perpetrator, and despite my proclivities. While we certainly maintain in the 'evil' nature, that being 'wrong', could it be it's not completely about the power dynamic, but instead about imprinting. As distasteful as the subject is, I do think this is worth exploring and could shed some light that might lead toward better understanding. We cannot solve a problem for which we don't understand the source, so I must admit that I have been short-sighted and small-minded in my reactions, b/c I do not understand the source and have made numerous assumptions around it (most which I maintain as common sense) but still some could stand further examination.

    Imprinting has proven to be incredibly powerful and I wonder if this is part of the power of porn. She made the argument that tribes in Papa New Guinea apparently have relations in front of their children without any adverse social affect and I can imagine this as normal in primitive cultures. But, where does 'intention' fit into the equation. This is the spiritual issue we are having with this right? Those cultures do not mean to harm or disempower their children, quite the opposite, they are 'teaching' them appropriate behavior for successful adulthood, according to their cultural norms.

    Also there are those patterns of imprinting not from porn at all, but maybe just from innocent experience at a young age, where between cousins or neighbors that early sexual exploration is imprinted as 'safe' and 'desirable' and mutual and whatever, which then does not mature, for whatever cultural, or individual reason.

    Whereas here and now, the 'cultural norms' seem to be shifting dramatically from the top-down.

    Whereas here and now, according to the stories I'm hearing and the data being gathered according to those in the know, this is not about empowerment at all, but about creating victims, about disempowering and using children for personal gain and satisfaction. It is not about passing down success, about ancient rites of passage, but about gaining advantage. Social scientists want to gain the objectivity of other sciences, but in fact, it's just not the same. I think this is being used against them in the credibility game, because we end up in the very unsavory waters of moral relativism.

    Is there something spiritual about intention that we are underestimating and maybe even under-exploiting for those of us who understand ethics?

    Maybe the road to hell is paved with good intention, but then where is the road of bad intention leading us?
     
    Last edited: Feb 19, 2018
  4. LetsEat

    LetsEat Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2016
    Messages:
    360
    Assuming I understand you, while it may be possible to completely change many peoples sexual norms to include (non-harmful) pedophilia it's not worth the cost. There is already a broken trail of bodies left behind the current attempts to do so and even if it was successful it does not negate that there are predators out there who are so far removed from any societal moral system that this would only further enable them to abuse children and claim it was consensual.
     
    hypermagda likes this.
  5. Mishelle

    Mishelle Member

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2017
    Messages:
    215
    Home Page:
    Actually that's not what I meant! I'm not trying to draw any new conclusions from this in that ALL pedophilia is harmful to children and it is imprinting in a negative way, even if in the moment the child might be physically enjoying something.

    What I'm trying to do is open up my own line of questioning about the violators. I was being exceptionally black and white about them, maybe. I think this is possibly what Laird was trying to do? Do they ALL mean to cause harm? Or, could it be that some are emotionally/physically/psychically stuck in a childhood mentality themselves, so in this case it would be like condemning a 'retarded' person to prison for crimes he committed that he does not understand.

    I absolutely do not want to shift focus of pity, compassion, victimization onto them! But I do now suspect even more deeply that the porn industry and the easy access is very detrimental to children b/c of this, that there could be a significant difference between sado-pedo and 'attraction' to children by men/adults. And also, that enough is known about sexual/social imprinting of children that those who continue to produce this material and those publishing/employing them know exactly what is happening to the children as culture as far as damage and this is very deliberate.

    On a side note, my sister had not ever researched "pizzagate" but had lots of awareness around the highly publicized "me too" campaign. A highly successful diversion tactic by the media, I'd say.

    So maybe we do want to continue to question pedophilia from the sadistic angle, or maybe there is more than one angle that needs to be addressed as well. I really don't know, I'm just trying to learn.
     
    LetsEat likes this.
  6. Laird

    Laird Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2015
    Messages:
    1,355
    Pretty much, yes. I think we all agree that there are certain offenders out there who could reasonably be described as "evil" or "demonic": sick individuals who actually take pleasure in the most vile of sexual and other perversions of children; fiends who see the most vulnerable as objects to defile; recalcitrants who are very likely immune to rehabilitation: release them into the community, and, given the chance, they will simply continue to abuse, as much as they can, without compunction.

    I'm just asking: does everybody who feels some sort of attraction to prepubescent children necessarily fit this dark, dark profile? Is there perhaps some scope for nuance? I mean, who amongst us does not have to fight some sort of temptation? Are we defined by the temptations to which we are subject or by our resistance to those temptations? Is "Adam" a monster for feeling an attraction to prepubescent children, or a hero for resisting those feelings, for refusing to be turned into a monster - or is he even something more nuanced and in-between?

    ---

    AryaS, I still hope to respond to your post above - am still digging into those stats which I can find.
     
    Last edited: Feb 20, 2018
    Mishelle likes this.
  7. Laird

    Laird Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2015
    Messages:
    1,355
    Let me share the primary source I'm mining for stats - perhaps we can all mine it together. It is very long, which is why - along with distractibility - I am taking so long to get through it. It's an Australian government document, Misperceptions about child sex offenders. I found it simply through a Google search on "paedophilia statistics", and I know nothing else about it or about its author, Kelly Richards.

    In any case, here's a quote within it that I've just come across and which aligns with that which I wrote in my last post, and which Mishelle seems to be leaning towards:

     
  8. Charlie Primero

    Charlie Primero Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2017
    Messages:
    701
    Mentally retarded people have a broad range of culpability for their negative behaviors.

    I used to work at a group home with high-functioning MR individuals, I.Q. 60 - 70. One of my guys had a penchant for stealing Hustler magazines and beer every time we stopped at a convenience store.

    He never was prosecuted for theft as I would be for that exact same behavior because of his diminished mental capacity, and thus culpability.

    That standard applies to adult pedophiles. No matter how strong their mental illness, they have a duty to control it, are culpable, and must be separated from society if they cannot.
     
    hypermagda, AryaS and Mishelle like this.
  9. Mishelle

    Mishelle Member

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2017
    Messages:
    215
    Home Page:
    This was another point my sister made, though I'd say not a hero, just humane. This should be what it means to be human, imo, resisting and refusing to cause pain (especially knowingly), refusing to betray the innocence of children, or use others for personal gain and satisfaction without equal reciprocity.

    To be a hero he'd have to take it to the next level and use his unique perspective/situation to reverse the abuse in others, help victims, perhaps become an undercover agent. Now that I'd call heroism. I didn't finish that article b/c it was too disgusting and manipulative, so maybe he did do that?
     
    Laird likes this.
  10. Laird

    Laird Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2015
    Messages:
    1,355
    No, and I think you're right that in that respect he's not a hero. He did though reach out to others like him and provide (recognised) leadership to the group to remain - as you rightly put it - "human".
     
    Mishelle likes this.
  11. AryaS

    AryaS Member

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2017
    Messages:
    220
    Hi Mishelle and Laird,
    I appreciate both of your comments, I just do not share your desire to learn more about the nuances of pedophiles. I have known a few pedophiles in real life -- and while they were not the violent sado-pedophiles described by Dr. Handrahan (or those participating in the acts depicted in the hard-core child pornography of which "Adam" was so fond), the damage they caused with their abuse also destroyed the lives and the sexuality of their victims (yes, via imprinting). I just don't want to take the spotlight away from the victims to discuss whether we should be more forgiving of various types of pedophiles and their "temptations," which I fear this thread has now become derailed to discuss. I agree with Charlie -- no matter how strong an impulse is, no matter the abuse/imprinting one received as a child, a person has a choice to do right or wrong. And if they don't know right from wrong, they need to be separated from society. Choosing to use children sexually (whether violently or not) is a choice. Watching and contributing to the torture of children/infants via hard core child porn is a choice. Making the choice to abuse - or support abuse -- is morally repugnant. I don't have any sympathy once they have crossed either line, just as I have no sympathy for serial killers or cannibals.

    Another thought that came to me: It must be an affront to the children Ms. LaTourneau supposedly is endowed to help that she is making TedTalks about her "humbling" experience with a graduate student who just happened to clue her in on "non-offending pedophiles." Isn't that a little hard to believe too? A seasoned and published researcher on child abuse....has to be schooled by a journalist/student writing his "Master's Thesis" who stumbled upon a nice group of early adolescent pedophiles? Or is this just a convenient narrative to explain why LaTourneau is asking people to focus their sympathies on the offenders and not the victims now?. It's about as plausible as Gordon Wasson "stumbling" upon the Magic Mushroom....

    I am reading the newly released book by Moira Greyland called "The Last Closet: The Dark Side of Avalon." Just downloaded it and cannot put it down so far. Moira is/was the daughter of famous science fiction writer Marion Zimmer Bradley (best known for "The Mists of Avalon"). Her father was a known pederast who wrote the tome Greek Love (which, not surprisingly, waxes poetic for man-boy "love".). Moira was first raped by her father when she was five and sexually abused by her mother since the age of three. She was "shared" with some of her parents friends as well. If you want to read a first-hand account of all the damage that childhood sexual abuse does to the children -- even where the parents are insisting that the children "enjoy" it and that it "liberates" them, I'd urge you to get this book. It just came out in December and is available on Kindle. There are passages I may share, but don't have the time at the moment.
     
    Mishelle and hypermagda like this.
  12. Charlie Primero

    Charlie Primero Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2017
    Messages:
    701
    LOL Indeed.

    Using fabricated narratives to push a social agenda is not uncommon.

    I recall Jane Goodall got busted for it recently.
     
    Mishelle and AryaS like this.
  13. AryaS

    AryaS Member

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2017
    Messages:
    220
    Laird,
    I just cannot understand how you would call someone a "hero" who had been downloading "pre-teen hardcorn porn" for at least two years.....the fabricated article even takes pains to point out that the victim was one and a half years old....do you REALLY think -- even assuming for one second that this Adam exists (which I contend he does not) that these images he was downloading showed pre-verbal children enjoying being raped and assaulted? If not, how is his continuing urge to masturbate to these images -- even after he saw the ONE apparently lone image where the infant was clearly not enjoying it -- heroic? Or even normal human behavior? Sorry to call you out like this, but this is pretty revolting.
     
    hypermagda likes this.
  14. Mishelle

    Mishelle Member

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2017
    Messages:
    215
    Home Page:
    I have not had the right overview of how the various segments of this saga connect and I found this vid, which seems to be naming the right names I've been hearing and have little apparent bias, so far, but I've just found them. I think it's worth a listen in any case, b/c there may be more to the link between 'pedo-gate' and 'me too' than I originally suspected.

     
  15. Mishelle

    Mishelle Member

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2017
    Messages:
    215
    Home Page:
    Did she? Can you post a source? Guess that's derailing the thread, sorry, but I am interested in this!
     
  16. Mishelle

    Mishelle Member

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2017
    Messages:
    215
    Home Page:
    It was not at all my intention to derail the thread. I was trying to get to the source of the crisis, which oftentimes requires deviation from the mean.

    How would you have us get more on track? You've shown real leadership here and I don't want to get in your way with my sophomoric questions.
     
  17. AryaS

    AryaS Member

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2017
    Messages:
    220

    Hi Mishelle,
    Sorry, I am just frustrated (and venting) that we are spending any time sympathizing with the offenders who have caused so much pain and suffering and ruined so many lives -- instead of focusing on exposing the child rapists and offering support and assistance and a voice for the victims. I am also frustrated that there is a clear agenda afoot to normalize pedophilia, and some people are falling for it. This "16 year old pedo who needs help" article is no different than the NYT and Salon articles that ran last year that also tried to get people thinking of pedophiles in terms of people suffering from a disability who need sympathy and resources, not condemnation, criminal registration, and criminal prosecution.

    I think (hope) we all know that we are being manipulated each and every day by the media and by "experts" who crank out self-serving reports and statistics to further an agenda, whatever it may be. Knowing this, for every article I read, I always try to ask myself: what is this author trying to sell me? How does he/she want me to think about whatever topic he/she is writing about? The "16 year old non-offending pedo" article clearly is meant to elicit sympathy and hopefully get people thinking about pedophiles in a much more sympathetic light. But is this a true story -- or is it fabricated to serve an ongoing agenda? And even if these "non-offending" adolescent pedophiles exist, what is the reason these stories are being highlighted in the MSM now, in the wake of PG and other trafficking ring/rampant pedophilia revelations? Is it to try to soften the blow? Get people thinking of these people as less-than-monsters?

    I could go paragraph by paragraph in that article and explain what each paragraph was intended to do. I know you could do the same Mishelle. I've mentioned several of these narrative devices already -- and I believe you have as well -- so I'll try not to repeat myself here. But I do wonder why Ms. LaTourneau tells her TedTalk audience that she met Adam and his merry band of non-offending pedophiles via a "student writing his master's thesis"? Is it because "master's thesis" sounds much more objectively researched and credible than a click-bait piece of narrative journalism? Because clearly this article is no master's thesis -- there are no footnotes or supporting references that I can see - and the article doesn't mention a master's thesis at all, if I recall correctly. Instead, as you and I have already noted, it is written in the highly dubious pseudo-journalism narrative fiction format that was quite popular with disgraced making-it-all-up journalist Stephen Glass. Something is clearly being sold here.

    And yet someone as intelligent as Laird finds this article persuasive/credible and cannot see the manipulative fiction-writing devices used or the troubling red flags/contradictions both here and in the TedTalk. Maybe it's because if he can't see it, then the article has likely influenced many others far less intelligent than Laird. I guess this totally and completely depresses me. So now that we've made the plight of transgenders sympathetic and "heroic" (and I don't necessarily have a problem with that in a vacuum, but it clearly was on someone's agenda), let's just move right along to "intergenerational sex."

    @Let's Eat: Just tell me what shoes I need to get for the Doomsday Cult.
     
    Mishelle and hypermagda like this.
  18. Laird

    Laird Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2015
    Messages:
    1,355
    Well, maybe it's hard to understand because I wouldn't actually say that. I've simply posed the question: is this person on one extreme (a monster), the other (a hero), or something in-between? I haven't answered it, but if any answer might be seen to have been implied, it was the last option - at least, that's how I would answer it.

    I understand that you feel that the thread has been derailed. Please go ahead and direct it as you see fit - I will not, after all, respond to your post second from top-of-page, nor to any others on this theme. I don't think there's much to be gained from arguing back-and-forth over whether Luke's article is good journalism pointing to a potentially helpful path towards preventing (at least some) child sexual abuse before it even begins, or a psy-op or some other social engineering scheme designed to normalise and elicit sympathy for abusers. Maybe here, too, the truth lies somewhere between the two extremes.
     
  19. Charlie Primero

    Charlie Primero Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2017
    Messages:
    701
  20. Mishelle

    Mishelle Member

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2017
    Messages:
    215
    Home Page:
    Not seeing any 'busting' done on either of these from these searches. Is this a case of an automatic search filtering for different biases based on locale or something?

    I'd love to read a direct source if you have it, what I get here are lots of titles talking about frauds they helped uncover by going against the scientific grain. Very odd! There is only one 'critique' that comes up on Goodall's last book, from 2 years ago, but by a writer (at The Daily Beast) who says right in the text that he never read it and talks only gossip.

    Again, if you have something great please pass it along and I will drop this topic from clogging this thread.
     
    malf likes this.

Share This Page