Examining the Myth of the Gay Agenda

[OllieFranz]

I've never understood why homosexuality and paedophilia were linked in the first place. Gay men like, well, men. And the physical attributes that go with that. Which children simply don't have.

I believe it goes back to Victorian "sporting gentlemen." One of their urban sports was seducing and deflowering young servant girls. When the US and UK grew a conscience about the general treatment of young people, including the "lower classes" (think of Dickens' novels), they started noticing this abuse. As a diversionary tactic newspapers owned by many of these "gentlemen" stated the scare that boys of all classes (which would include the middle and upper class liberal activists own sons) were being seduced and "inverted" by the sodomites.

That's why Oscar Wilde's trial became so sensational. Then in the Fifties, Sen Joe McCarthy found the rumor a useful tool in demonizing "homosexual communists," keeping it alive for another generation or so.

 

[Polycarp1]

"The Gay Agenda" strikes me as being very much like "the gay lifestyle" -- it's a stereotype which does not exist in real life, founded loosely on some shared characteristics which do exist.

Certainly the overwhelming majority of GLBT people support mot of the same list of social reforms: equal access to the legal usufructs of civil marriage, non-discrimination in employment and housing, equal treatment at law including equal protection from bullying and assault, repeal of DOMA and DADT....

But just as the same 'lifestyyle' descriptor is invalid in describing a 14-year-old in the closet, terrified that parents and schoolmates may find out he/she has homosexual desires, a 20-year-old promiscuous party animal, a committed couple in their late 30s working at white collar jobs and with two adopted children, and the retired man who masturbates to gay internet porn, so too can you not nail down one list of social changes supported by every gay person whatsoever.

And it is the rankest form of paranoia on the part of conservative Christians to think that gay people are out to destroy anything that the conservatives hold precious, except perhaps the institutionalized homophobia that substitutes for Christian values in their ideology.

 

[Archer93]

I never said all homosexuals are pedophiles. All I said was that the homosexual community took enourmous advantage of the sexual-slave trade that existed in Rome and Babylon(Nero, Hadrian, Alexander the Great, etc)

As Lawtonfogle said, so did the heterosexuals.
And given that there have always been more of what we now refer to as heterosexuals than there are of what we now refer to as homosexuals, it would seem that the heterosexuals were more guilty of taking advantage of slavery for sexual purposes....

And it's not as if the only same sex sexual activity was between owner and slaves; Caeser was 'every woman's man and every man's woman', while Alexander the Great was 'ruled by Hephaestion's thighs'

I can't point to any examples of purely gay people- that concept didn't exist at the time. In roughly the same way I can't refer to a 13th century Dominatrix- the term just wasn't around.

People with a History: Suetonius: Julius Caesar 2, 45-53
Alexander the Great - Indopedia, the Indological knowledgebase.

 

[Polycarp1]

I believe it goes back to Victorian "sporting gentlemen." One of their urban sports was seducing and deflowering young servant girls. When the US and UK grew a conscience about the general treatment of young people, including the "lower classes" (think of Dickens' novels), they started noticing this abuse. As a diversionary tactic newspapers owned by many of these "gentlemen" stated the scare that boys of all classes (which would include the middle and upper class liberal activists own sons) were being seduced and "inverted" by the sodomites.

That's why Oscar Wilde's trial became so sensational. Then in the Fifties, Sen Joe McCarthy found the rumor a useful tool in demonizing "homosexual communists," keeping it alive for another generation or so.

Nice point. There was a truly terrible pun founded in the fact that Victorians turned a blind eye to the known homosexual behavior of boys' boardiong schools, where it was kept behind closed doors, but Wilde was relatively blatant about his behavior, to the effect that Wilde refused to fight by the Marquess of Queensbury's rules -- the pun, of course, being founded in the fact that 'Boysie', Wilde's lover, was the Marquess's son (and it was the same man who codified boxing rules and who instituted the legal case against Wilde).

 

[Supernaut]

As I said, my only point was only that I can paint with a bigger brush.

LOL That's it! I am headin to the home depot. I will not be outgunned!!

 

[lawtonfogle]

LOL That's it! I am headin to the home depot. I will not be outgunned!!

I am so glad I wasn't in class when I read this post.

 

[lawtonfogle]

I think it's a denial thing. It's a terrible thought, that fathers abuse their daughters, so by pushing it off to a group that can be easier to think of as 'Other' makes those people more comfortable. Plus it seems easier to keep children away from random gay men, so there's also a feeling of 'doing something to prevent abuse'.
Admirable sentiment, wanting to reduce the incidence of child abuse. Totally ineffective way to go about it.

For some reason, our society is infatuated with doing things which appear to increase our safety, regardless if they actually make it safer.

I've never understood why homosexuality and paedophilia were linked in the first place. Gay men like, well, men. And the physical attributes that go with that. Which children simply don't have.

Do you want the reason I link them, or that the average person who links them links them?

The average person who links them does so as an attack on homosexuals, to try to paint them as a bad guy. Though they are making the mistake of confusing pedophiles and child molesters to begin with, kinda like trying to run a race with your shoes tied together.

The reason I link them is because I think pedophiles (NOT child molesters) share some of the same struggles as homosexuals (being hated by a large portion of society, being called a monster for a sexual attraction you have no control over). I also secretly... ok, so it may not be a secret, having 'sexologist' on my list of things to be/do (it is after 'build artificial intelligence', but before 'help artificial intelligence conquer world'), and I think to fully understand sexuality in humans, we have to understand not just heterosexuality (which I have a head start on), but all the other forms of sexuality, be it homosexuality, deviations like pedophilia, or really twisted deviations like sadist who want non-consenting partners (just a note, most sadist want to be in a consenting relationship).

 

[lawtonfogle]

How do the 'homosexuality = pedophilia' people reconcile that many, perhaps even most, child molesters tend to be fathers who molest their daughters?

The largest group of child molesters are those who molest either a child or a step child. This is not to say that these constitute most pedophiles.



For example.

Group A is 40%
Group B is 30%
Group C is 20%
Group D is 10%

Group A is the largest, but they do not make up most of the people in groups.

 

[Keres]

The largest group of child molesters are those who molest either a child or a step child. This is not to say that these constitute most pedophiles.



For example.

Group A is 40%
Group B is 30%
Group C is 20%
Group D is 10%

Group A is the largest, but they do not make up most of the people in groups.

Which is why I said 'many, perhaps even most' rather than 'most'. Exact statistics on this are unknown, as many of these crimes go unreported and undiscovered.

 

[lawtonfogle]

Which is why I said 'many, perhaps even most' rather than 'most'. Exact statistics on this are unknown, as many of these crimes go unreported and undiscovered.

Ah, sorry about that, I misread your post.

 

[Keres]

Ah, sorry about that, I misread your post.

'Sokay.

If I were to say parents who molest their children, it would unquestioningly be most. But there are also mothers who molest and fathers who molest sons. If I were to push it out to children who are molested by family members, we'd be approaching 90%. If I were to push it out to children who are molested by family members or people trusted by the family, we'd be at about 99%.

Stranger Danger education was about as effective in preventing molestation as a baseball cap would be in preventing traumatic head injuries.

 

[lawtonfogle]

'Sokay.

If I were to say parents who molest their children, it would unquestioningly be most. But there are also mothers who molest and fathers who molest sons. If I were to push it out to children who are molested by family members, we'd be approaching 90%. If I were to push it out to children who are molested by family members or people trusted by the family, we'd be at about 99%.

Stranger Danger education was about as effective in preventing molestation as a baseball cap would be in preventing traumatic head injuries.

I thought it was that family member and family friends count for 90% of all molestations, not family members alone?

But I agree, stranger danger is one of the cases of attempting to make us feel safe without actually making us safer.

 

[Keres]

I thought it was that family member and family friends count for 90% of all molestations, not family members alone?

Depending on the study, I've seen family members put at anything between 80 and 95%, and family friends put at anything from an additional 5 to 18%.

Family member molestations are also the type most likely to go unreported. Back when I attended church (I was already an atheist at this point, but attended because my grandmother wanted me too), I saw kids pressured into not going to the cops and turning in their molesters and instead 'letting the church help them seek redemption'. One of many reasons I don't have a lot of respect for most organized religions, as I've either seen or been told of this occurring in multiple churches.

But in addition to family friends, there are those that aren't friends but still trusted by the family. Teachers, clergy, coaches, club leaders, etc..

Very few kids are actually molested by anyone that can actually be termed a 'stranger'. It's rare enough that it usually makes the news when it happens.

 

[RocketRed]

The reason I link them is because I think pedophiles (NOT child molesters) share some of the same struggles as homosexuals (being hated by a large portion of society, being called a monster for a sexual attraction you have no control over). I also secretly... ok, so it may not be a secret, having 'sexologist' on my list of things to be/do (it is after 'build artificial intelligence', but before 'help artificial intelligence conquer world'), and I think to fully understand sexuality in humans, we have to understand not just heterosexuality (which I have a head start on), but all the other forms of sexuality, be it homosexuality, deviations like pedophilia, or really twisted deviations like sadist who want non-consenting partners (just a note, most sadist want to be in a consenting relationship).

I agree that we should understand sexuality in all its forms, but I have to point out, that we have shared similar struggles is pretty much the only applicable link between homosexuals and pedophiles. There are distinguishing characteristics that set the two groups apart and I think that while it's true homosexuals share some of the same sort of struggles that pedophiles have, the differences between them are important.

Though I'm generally adverse to comparisons-to-make-a-point when it comes to this sort of thing anyway. Comparing gay people to African Americans during the civil rights movement, comparing, say... Bush or Obama to Hitler; these things just plainly miss the mark. I think I feel a bit of that in the pedophiles::homosexuals thing. There are important differences that set us apart and it seems like people are ignoring them when people say things like that.
Lookit: I guess you could say that Bush and Obama are like Hitler in that were/are controversial leaders of a country at war. They do have a link. But that link is under the oceans of difference between those men. Same for gay people and the civil rights movement. Yes, there's a similarity in that they're both social groups oppressed in some way by society that are fighting for their rights and equality. But again, the differences are staggering. Same deal with homosexuals and pedophiles. Yes, we've had similar struggles as sexualities that have been relegated to the bottom of the pyramid and have all sorts of nasty things floating around the social consciousness about them. But we are very different.
And those differences are important when we're talking about the gay rights movement.

 

[OllieFranz]

Family member molestations are also the type most likely to go unreported. Back when I attended church (I was already an atheist at this point, but attended because my grandmother wanted me too), I saw kids pressured into not going to the cops and turning in their molesters and instead 'letting the church help them seek redemption'. One of many reasons I don't have a lot of respect for most organized religions, as I've either seen or been told of this occurring in multiple churches.

And before anyone goes off on the Catholic Church because of this, it goes on in churches of every stripe, including fundamentalist Protestant churches. The Catholics get the bad rap because 1) they are a hierarchical organization and the complicity in the cover-up often reaches the highest levels, and 2) most people don't trust celibates to really be celibate, and when a horrible but sensational violation of the vow of celibacy occurs, they get to say "See, I told you so."

The act is just as horrible when done by someone who is married, and the breaking of the vow of fidelity is just as serious as the breaking of the vow of celibacy. And it may be that the only reason higher levels of the church organization are not implicated is because their denomination structure is not an hierarchy.

 

[Keres]

I agree that we should understand sexuality in all its forms, but I have to point out, that we have shared similar struggles is pretty much the only applicable link between homosexuals and pedophiles.

No, actually, they haven't shared similar struggles. Unless, of course, you are raping people or otherwise engaging in sexual encounters without the benefit of the consent of the other party.

There is far more basis for the comparison to the civil rights movement, especially because the same arguments once used against interracial marriage (and still used, see - http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/15/interracial-couple-denied_n_322784.html) are used to decry homosexual marriage.

 

[OllieFranz]

No, actually, they haven't shared similar struggles. Unless, of course, you are raping people or otherwise engaging in sexual encounters without the benefit of the consent of the other party.

There is far more basis for the comparison to the civil rights movement, especially because the same arguments once used against interracial marriage (and still used, see - Interracial Couple Denied Marriage License By Louisiana Justice Of The Peace) are used to decry homosexual marriage.

Once again: you are conflating the attraction (pedophila) with the action (child molesting). It's the same thing that others do when when they conflate the attraction (homosexuality) with the action (a**l s*x) and condemn all homosexuals as perverted sinners and "sodomites."

The only difference is that all pedophiles are hiding in the closet, and so we only see the ones who are caught as child molesters. We have no idea how many innocent pedophiles may be out there who are masters of themselves and manage their attraction in safe and legal ways, and can only guess at their number.

 

[lawtonfogle]

I agree that we should understand sexuality in all its forms, but I have to point out, that we have shared similar struggles is pretty much the only applicable link between homosexuals and pedophiles. There are distinguishing characteristics that set the two groups apart and I think that while it's true homosexuals share some of the same sort of struggles that pedophiles have, the differences between them are important.

Though I'm generally adverse to comparisons-to-make-a-point when it comes to this sort of thing anyway. Comparing gay people to African Americans during the civil rights movement, comparing, say... Bush or Obama to Hitler; these things just plainly miss the mark. I think I feel a bit of that in the pedophiles::homosexuals thing. There are important differences that set us apart and it seems like people are ignoring them when people say things like that.
Lookit: I guess you could say that Bush and Obama are like Hitler in that were/are controversial leaders of a country at war. They do have a link. But that link is under the oceans of difference between those men. Same for gay people and the civil rights movement. Yes, there's a similarity in that they're both social groups oppressed in some way by society that are fighting for their rights and equality. But again, the differences are staggering. Same deal with homosexuals and pedophiles. Yes, we've had similar struggles as sexualities that have been relegated to the bottom of the pyramid and have all sorts of nasty things floating around the social consciousness about them. But we are very different.
And those differences are important when we're talking about the gay rights movement.

Actually, I find in the gay right movement is where the differences matter the least. That is to say (as seen in the pedophilia and teaching thread), excluding the issue of gay marriage, many of the things homosexuals are fighting for are the same things I would think pedophiles would also want.

For example, part of the gay movement is to stop the discrimination in the military. The few stories I have read about a pedophile being found out in the military (in cases where he has done nothing wrong, for example he spoke about his attractions with a chaplain, who turned around and outed him), he gets mistreated extensively.

Gays are fighting to not be fired from jobs just because they are gays. I would think that a pedophile who came out would run the same risk, and would even guess that they run it to a greater extent.

Gays are fighting so that they will not be assaulted just for being gay. I would think that pedophiles who are open about it have quite a high chance of being assaulted as well.

Remember, it is not the homosexual only movement, it is the GLBT(Q) movement, which includes more than homosexuals, but many groups who are outcast because of their sexuality. Is it so hard to add a P on the end of that movement?

As to the comparisons you mention, I find comparing the fight for homosexual marriage similar to the fight for interracial marriage.

Also, I do compare Obama and Hitler. They were (well, Obama is) great speakers. Besides for that, there is little of comparison that makes sense.

 

[lawtonfogle]

No, actually, they haven't shared similar struggles. Unless, of course, you are raping people or otherwise engaging in sexual encounters without the benefit of the consent of the other party.

I said the struggles of pedophiles, not the struggles of child molesters/rapist.

 

[lawtonfogle]

Once again: you are conflating the attraction (pedophila) with the action (child molesting). It's the same thing that others do when when they conflate the attraction (homosexuality) with the action (a**l s*x) and condemn all homosexuals as perverted sinners and "sodomites."

The only difference is that all pedophiles are hiding in the closet, and so we only see the ones who are caught as child molesters. We have no idea how many innocent pedophiles may be out there who are masters of themselves and manage their attraction in safe and legal ways, and can only guess at their number.

And one needs to ask his/herself why do they hide? For all the hate homosexuals get, I think the non-offending pedophile gets it worse.