So which gay organizations promote pedophilia

[Dessi]

NAMBLA. Does anyone give a crap about NAMBLA? Last time I checked that group was the fringe of the fringe, universally maligned by LGBT people across the planet.

Now, speaking as someone who's a relative "insider" to the LGBT community (I'm a member of several LGBT groups in Omaha, donated money to dozens of groups nationwide, met around 100 or so gay and trans people in person in past 2 years, read LGBT news and blogs pretty much everyday for the past few years, participated on LGBT panels and such), I've never seen anyone legitimize pedophilia, never seen anyone suggest lowering the age of consent, never heard anything outside of very strong condemnation of child sexual abuse.

And its not like we don't talk about it. The recent Sandusky sex abuse case was a hot topic in the group on Saturday, we talked about anti-LGBT bullying and the pervasive myths connecting homosexuality to pedophilia in the PFLAG national convention last week, we talk about child abuse cases that occur in Omaha.

In my experience, more broadly the experience everyone I'm connected to through the LGBT groups, the people they're connected to in the national level, everyone at PFLAG, GLAAD, GLSEN, and other groups have never condoned pedophilia.

In all seriousness, are there any LGBT groups which actually advocate pedophilia?

 

[Ysidro]

According to some, all LGBT groups do that.

These people are wrong, crazy, and bigotted.

I know of none in the real world. Alas, that won't stop haters from lying to justifuy their hate.

 

[slingblade]

I have never looked to see if this were happening, so I don't know.

In another thread, a link was given to a blog discussing "non-acting pedophiles," and in one response, a self-identified gay man said (paraphrasing) he'd always felt sympathy for non-acting pedophiles, who have an orientation it's not acceptable to act upon. His sympathy--which I find more like a sort of empathy--comes from being gay and having an orientation that was long unacceptable to act upon, and in some regards, still is. "It's okay to be gay, as long as you never act on it."

And that, I find rather boggling, cruel, and unrealistic. But then, reading his reply caused me to do some serious thinking. Could I also find empathy or sympathy for a person who doesn't choose to be sexually attracted to children, but who nonetheless is? I have to admit, I do find it quite sad. At the same time, I really don't want them to act on it.

I guess what I'm trying to convey is that while I don't know of any GLBT orgs that would approve or condone, I imagine the same sort of empathy could exist, at least.

 

[Stereolab]

I learned everything I needed to know from this.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=ijbovskICjk

 

[TsarBomba]

I don't think that NAMBLA even exists anymore as a going concern.

 

[ponderingturtle]

I am in favor of rationalizing age of consent so that if someone makes an issue of it you do not have long sentences for an 18 year old and someone 18 months younger. There is too much depending on selective prosecution.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

In all seriousness, are there any LGBT groups which actually advocate pedophilia?

The Catholic Church?

Oops! I guess they're not technically an LGBT group.

 

[Rasmus]

Oh, I'd have empathy for a paedophile. It must be is tough when you cannot act on your urges and desire - more so if the urges are strong and even more so if you can never act on them.

But as much as that doesn't give me an excuse to rape an adult woman just because I might never have a chance to get her consent to having sex with me, it will never be an excuse for the paedophile to rape their victims.

Yes, I can at least have sex with other women - but those roles don't exist because we want to be mean to peadophiles or because we do not understand them. And that is the difference to anti-gay discrimination, too: Adults giving informed consent, and all that.

I am not involved inthe LGBT community, but used to hang out on places like alt.politics.homosexuality (yes, i am old eonugh for usenet...) and back then the bigots arguments tended to go along the lines of "most peadophiles are gay, so a gay person is more likely to be a paedophile, so every gay person is just too dangerous to be trusted, ever."

All of these turn out to be wrong, of course. "Peadophiles are gay" as a conclusion derives from "man molests boy, he must be gay". But if we assume that this is true, then this type of self-identified homosexualitxy is quite different from the kind of homosexuality that other self-identified gays admit to. Basic fallacy of equivocation, and an obvious one to boot.

Speaking as a boring heterosexual male, I am attracted to adult-women. Not to adult-men and not to children-anything. If I look at a child I see nothing of sexual interest to me, even if the child is female. I am not interested in a female child *much less* than a female adult, I am not interested at all, just like I am not interested at all in male children.

That I am interested in adult females does not make me dangeorus to female children any more or less than I am dangerous to male children. I am far more lilkely to find myself attracted to an adult male than any child - and I really do not have any homosexual tendencies whatsoever.

And that is where the missunderstanding lies: The assumption is that these orientations or attractions are the same, when they are not. The idea is that someone who is interested in males will be interested both in children and adults, if only the interest in males is big enough. Personally, I'll buy that when I find myself attracted to female children on the grounds that they are just like female adults.

But if youstart from the assumption that one perversion is just like the other, and that some people simply give in ot their perversions rather than doing the decent thing and surpressing them, this view makes al ot of sense, I guess. (Here I like to start speculating on what perversions these people are successfully surpesssing themselves, even though admitedly they might just happen to be perfectly "normal" in every possible aspect. ...)

 

[ChristineR]

If you care to look, you can find any number of variants--groups promoting sex between adult males and underage females, groups promoting sex between adult females and underage females, and at least one group promoting sex between adult females and underage males.

What makes me angry about this is that no one blames it on heterosexuality when some nasty old coach messes with eight year old girls.

So offhand I don't remember the name of the pro-female on female abuse site and right now I'm not able to go searching for it. But as I recall almost all the members were adult males, not actual lesbians.

 

[Moss]

From the few tidbits I know of the German LGBT scene at one time there was some connection (back in the seventies/eighties) when people "kinda" thought pedophilia was like homosexuality. Luckily people with a shred of sense prevailed and the links between the groups were cut. It still comes back as a spectre to haunt the media every few years though.
I might have to dig around a bit about that. I'm not too knowledgeable about that as I am not involved in LGBT politics and only get to hear stuff about that from my homosexual and transgender friends.

 

[pgwenthold]

NAMBLA. Does anyone give a crap about NAMBLA? Last time I checked that group was the fringe of the fringe, universally maligned by LGBT people across the planet.

Shoot, for that matter, in what way is NAMBLA a "gay organization"? It is a pedophile organization, but afaik, it includes men of all other walks of life, including married men. Maybe I'm wrong.

 

[bonzombiekitty]

I am not involved inthe LGBT community, but used to hang out on places like alt.politics.homosexuality (yes, i am old eonugh for usenet...) and back then the bigots arguments tended to go along the lines of "most peadophiles are gay, so a gay person is more likely to be a paedophile, so every gay person is just too dangerous to be trusted, ever."

I like the retort:

Most pedophiles are men, therefor a man is more likely to be a pedophile, so every man is just too dangerous to be trusted, ever.

 

[ChristineR]

Well as pointed out NAMBLA barely exists anymore, but in days of yore they did try to equate themselves with the gay rights movement and presented themselves as somehow equal. They would frequently try and march in gay pride parades, and frequently be turned down, and sometimes get accepted and protested. Back in the seventies it was possible to find people who advocated sexual "liberation" for children fairly openly.

People did a lot of drugs then; that's the only explanation I can give.

 

[thatguywhojuggles]

I wouldn't call NAMBLA a gay organization that supports pedophilia, I'd call it a pedophilia organization that supports gay pedophiles.

 

[Tricky]

A quick google search reveals that there are any number of child-rearing organizations.

 

[cwalner]

Shoot, for that matter, in what way is NAMBLA a "gay organization"? It is a pedophile organization, but afaik, it includes men of all other walks of life, including married men. Maybe I'm wrong.

I can understand the confusion since it does exist to promote legalizing sexual relations with adult males and boys. (NAMBLA does stand for North American Man Boy Love Association).

However, as others have already stated, their focus has always been on pedophilia more that adult male relationships. Back when they were more active, they did make some attempts to lower the age of consent and even lower the voting age (trying to imply that 8 year olds had the maturity to vote and therefore consent).

 

[TJM]

Well as pointed out NAMBLA barely exists anymore, but in days of yore they did try to equate themselves with the gay rights movement and presented themselves as somehow equal. They would frequently try and march in gay pride parades, and frequently be turned down, and sometimes get accepted and protested. Back in the seventies it was possible to find people who advocated sexual "liberation" for children fairly openly.

People did a lot of drugs then; that's the only explanation I can give.

Hell, I'm old enough to remember when they sold magazines featuring under aged girls right next to Playboy and Penthouse.

As far as NAMBLA goes, they pretty much went completely underground when one of their meetings was crashed by a local TV station. As I recall, there wasn't a man there under the age of sixty and they weren't to keen about being outed. They all covered their faces with what they could and filed out. They're rarely heard from anymore.

 

[geni]

In my experience, more broadly the experience everyone I'm connected to through the LGBT groups, the people they're connected to in the national level, everyone at PFLAG, GLAAD, GLSEN, and other groups have never condoned pedophilia.

In all seriousness, are there any LGBT groups which actually advocate pedophilia?

Used to be (well strictly speaking hebephilia and ephebophilia). Various reasons. In part its because its only fairly recently they've come to be seen as such serious crimes. Another reason is that for a long time age of consent laws were used to discriminate against gays which in some cases resulted in wider opposition to them.

 

[sillyhead]

OMG TRICKY!!!! lol

Anyway, NAMBLA is alive and well in that many of its members and former members are organized in different ways across the net and the world. The website itself has been revamped pretty recently. The ones who are alive and not in jail are mostly over at boychat, though there are a few other sites they hang out at. Meetings are still held, though not formally. They're mostly small and recreational (ikr?). The biggest meetings they hold, formally, are held under the guise of trying to have a conversation with the mental health community, though, if you've watched their history, they've had to change their mission statement from one of "we want acceptance as we are" to "we just want to be able to get mental health care without being reported to the cops or treated like scum." I think the latter is important, if they are not offenders already. However, though that is their mission statement, it is not their mission. Their mission is still to be accepted as they are and to be allowed rights, such as the right to tell a therapist that they are currently raping a child and be protected from mandatory reporting laws simply because they are 'seeking help.'

I don't know any gay organization that promotes pedophilia. I have seen a lot of empathy of the sort that Slingblade talks about on blogs and such, but since NAMBLA was booted from ILGA (which dragged its feet about it and ended up getting it tossed out of UN talks for that reason), no LGBT group wants to be associated with them. You will find quotes from some pretty big LGBT personalities on the NAMBLA site, most of them spoken during the days when it was popular to be "radical," and what is more radical than talking about lowering the age of consent for gay teens? I do know that one of the personalities has been interviewed about his (then hers) stance about it and has retracted, and even asked NAMBLA to take his name and quote off the page, but they have refused. I believe all the others (who are still alive) are still pro-pedophilia/anti-age-of-consent.
http://nambla.org/people.html

I know that there are some people here who are involved in the leather community. If you take a look at that list, you'll see why I decided to get my ass as far away as possible from that community. I know that not all, or even most leatherfolk are pro-pedo, but enough are, and there are enough who don't care that they are, that I want nothing to do with it.

I won't even get started about the guys in Boston, but I will say that there have been quite a few LGBT personalities out there who are pro-pedo. They claim to be gay, and use the LGBT community as a microphone from which to spew their pro-pedo stances and attempts to normalize pedophilia. A lot of this has been scrubbed (though is easy to find in the wayback machine) after it was pointed out. I don't think Dan Tsang has scrubbed his stuff, but I'm not sure how many people even admire him anymore.

The problem with this is that idiots like the ones over on americans for truth see this sort of thing and screech gay = pedo. Of course, people who are not religious nuts and bigots don't buy it (or anything at all on their site), but they do try to use it, sometimes successfully, as ammunition against LGBTQ folks. (BSA anyone?)

 

[Zelenius]

To many right-wing Christians, ALL homosexual organizations promote pedophilia, since pedophilia and homosexuality are synonymous in right-wing Christian vocabulary. This has already been said but it should be repeated for anyone who doesn't know how the right-wing Christian's bigoted mind works.

This is part of the myth that there is a left-wing homosexual conspiracy to make children gay(if this did exist, sign me up, the world is already very overpopulated). This, of course, relies on the myth that people aren't born gay but have to be taught to be gay, usually by gay child molesters. This is absurd of course, but fits in rather nicely with Christian fairy tales, with the "good" straights versus the demonic Marxist homosexuals. Homosexuals/pedophiles are just minions of the Devil in his age old rivalry against God.