What an idiot, guess it’s always easier to blame others for their own guilt!
Hah! Yes, THAT’LL help his cause!
“Gay people are more likely to be peados, based on this book I one read!”
“Can you give us the name of that book or any studies to back it up?”
“No. But I know it’s true!”
My God. Where do they find these creepy fruitloops?
Thanks Pink News for the accompanying photo of some dude feeling up a babies foot….that’ll require several vodka shots to erase from my brain.
William Tam knew that he was going to be called to give evidence. And he knew that earlier on an expert witness had said there was no evidence to suggest gay people were more likely to abuse children than straight people. So he could have prepared himself.
If the evidence he wanted to cite was compelling, you’d think he’d at least remember the author. Silly billy. Game set and match to David Boles. No wonder these people didn’t want to take the witness stand on live TV – they’d instantly become a nationwide laughing stock. I’ll sign Tam up for my channel though.
Only one word is suitable for thie Prop 8 supporter….BOLLOCKS!
‘He said of Canada and “liberal” European countries: “Their legal age of consent is 14 or even as young as 13 years old’
That’s not correct. In countries, where civil unions or gay marriages has been legalised, with an age of consent above 15 (the UK, the Netherlands, Belgium, Norway, Finland, and Switzerland), I believe there have been no changes made to lower the age of consent other than to make gay sex, which was unequal at least in the UK, the same as straight sex. So it is incorrect to assert that gay rights advocates wish the age of consent to be lowered beyond the socially accepted age of 18 in California.
Lol 18, it SHOULD be lowered to 14 – 16. Do they really think people aren’t going to have sex before 18?!
Proposition 8 – Surely it should be called Proposition Hate.
Hallelujah pass the Kool Aid around!
This guy is perfect for the case. One of the things that gay-marriage supporters have to prove in order for the court to invalidate Prop 8 is that the people who organized the campaign and voted for it did so because of ANIMOSITY towards the LGBT community. This guy is the perfect example of that – his bigotry comes out in every sentence he speaks. A bad human being, for sure, but a good witness for us.
“My God. Where do they find these creepy fruitloops?”
@ The Grinch:
The hand in that photo belongs to a woman; probably the baby’s mother.
The man has provided no citations; just lies. How can any court of law not hold such utter ignorance in contempt? Why can this hillbilly testify without any kind of reference whatsoever?
I’m truly baffled by this. I mean, is he some sort of an expert? What exactly IS his story?
According to the 1990′s study by Remafedi et al. 90-98% of pedophiles are straight men. A child is more likely to be sexually assaulted by a straight male relative than an unknown gay man.
More fruitloops.. All good stuff for showing the court what this proposition was based on and supported by.
This man was one of the supporters of it and was called to demonstrate the type of person behind it.
Good work in getting him to air this rubbish.
This is the real epitome of the pro-marriage argument… a lot of people aren’t arguing about gay marriage at all, they’re taking off on some belief that gay people want to encourage sex with children or pedophilia.
If you oppose gay marriage, then I don’t agree with you but you’re entitled to that opinion. But I wish both sides could come together just to rid this debate of all the inflammatory ignorance.
People are dying in international wars every day. We don’t need to spread more hatred because of stupid misunderstandings.
Research by Professor Gene G Abel of Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons reveals that on average 150.2 boys are molested per homosexual paedophile offender, whereas only 19.8 girls are molested per heterosexual paedophile. Incredibly, homosexual offenders admitted between 23.4 and 281.7 acts of molesting boys.
Here, for example; are some notable research findings
• Homosexual Alfred Kinsey, the so-called preeminent sexual researcher in the history of sexual research, found in 1948 that 37 percent of all male homosexuals admitted to having sex with children under 17 years old.
• A very recent (2000) study published in the Archives of Sexual Behavior found that “The best epidemiological evidence indicates that only 2-4% of men attracted to adults prefer men. In contrast, around 25-40% of men attracted to children prefer boys. Thus, the rate of homosexual attraction is 620 times higher among pedophiles.”
• Another 2000 study in the Archives of Sexual Behavior found that”. . . all but 9 of the 48 homosexual men preferred the youngest two male age categories” for sexual activity;’ These age categories were fifteen and twenty years old.
• Yet another recent study in the Archives of Sexual Behavior found that “Pedophilia appears to have a greater than chance association with two other statistically infrequent phenomena. The first of these is homosexuality . . . Recent surveys estimate the prevalence of homosexuality, among men attracted to adults, in the neighborhood of 2%. In contrast, the prevalence of homosexuality among pedophiles may be as high as 30-40%.”
• A 1989 study in the Journal of Sex Research noted that ” . . . the proportion of sex offenders against male children among homosexual men is substantially larger than the proportion of sex offenders against female children among heterosexual men . . . the development of pedophilia is more closely linked with homosexuality than with heterosexuality.”
• A 1988 study of 229 convicted child molesters published in the Archives of Sexual Behavior found that 86% of pedophiles described themselves as homosexual or bisexual.
• In a 1984 Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy article, sex researchers found that “The proportional prevalence of [male] offenders against male children in this group of 457 offenders against children was 36 percent.”
• Homosexual activists Karla Jay and I Allen Young revealed in their 1979 Gay Report that 73% of all homosexuals I have acted as “chicken hawks” — that is, they have preyed on adolescent or younger boys.
• In a 1992 study published in the Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy, sex researchers K. Freud and R. I. Watson found that homosexual males are three times more likely than straight men to engage in pedophilia, and that the average pedophile victimizes between 20 and 150 boys before being arrested.
• A study by sex researchers Alan Bell and Martin Weinberg found that 25% of white homosexual men have had sex with boys sixteen years and younger.
Indeed, a significant minority of gays ultimately attest their introduction to the lifestyle by the predatory activity of mature homosexual men. This fact is consistently demonstrated over time and in separate surveys throughout the world.
And an unbiased reading of homosexuality history reveals the centrality of youth to its bizarre, chaotic customs. So, is there a link between the rise of gay culture and a global explosion of Internet interest in child pornography?
Thanks for all the statistics Trudy, but the point of the argument is Gay Marriage – are we entitled to the same basic human rights in relation to marriage as everyone else.
Your statistics do not prove the argument that allowing same sex marriage will undermine the institution of marriage at all. It is all smoke screen tactics to avoid the central question – are we as homosexual human beings entitled to all the same rights, under the law, afforded to hetrosexual human beings, in relation to marriage.
You have taken a selective set of research findings to support your point of view. Try reading all the reasearch on the subject and then make an objective decision based on that, but I suspect that you would not wish to do this as it would not support your blinkered view of the world as you wish it to be.
I live in a predominatly catholic country (Spain)that allows same sex marriage. They understand that marriage is a civil contract between two people who love each other, they see no difference between who the two people are. It seems to me that all you people bleating about same sex marriage are missing a fundamental point – marriage is a civil contract in the eyes of the law, a wedding is a religious ceremony in the eyes of the church. We don’t want weddings we want marriage and there is a big difference between the two.
Thankfully I live in an enlightened country, maybe one day the USA will stop being so uptight about human rights at home, after all they seem to like to tell the rest of the world how they should be running their countries and dictating their moral codes on everyone else.
Well firstly, much of your ‘research’ can be placed before 1994, and can be discounted due to the bias that homosexuality was still classed as a mental illness (UK) until then. I would take anything before then with a pinch of salt for that reason. I have psychology books from the 80’s (written by accredited authors) that clearly site homosexual attraction as disorder and quote paragraphs about sexual behaviour (even about heterosexual women) which have since been widely discounted by professionals in the field. Both your research pieces from 2000 are from the same organisation, by deduction, leaving us only one source of recent research to go on. This makes the research bias; there is nothing to compare it with apart from itself, which one can’t do if hoping to weigh up an array of ‘facts’.
You state, *In contrast, around 25-40% of men attracted to children prefer boys.*
Neither you or the research, make the distinction between paedophile and homosexual. It has the same weight as saying, “around 25-40% of men who engage in bestiality prefer female animals. Therefore heterosexuals are more likely to abuse animals.” That research appears twisted deliberately to that viewpoint, doesn’t it? There’s a difference between attraction to animals and attraction to women. In the same way Homosexual attraction and paedophilia are two very different things.
You then state, *Another 2000 study in the Archives of Sexual Behavior found that”. . . all but 9 of the 48 homosexual men preferred the youngest two male age categories” for sexual activity;’ These age categories were fifteen and twenty years old.*
OK, where to start? Firstly what ages were the 48 homosexuals? Where they 19? Where they 65? This makes a big difference. Obviously a young man will be more inclined to date another young person. Maybe the other 9 were from an older age group and all the others where young people? Another point being that a 20yr old is not a child by law. How many of the test group chose the ages between 18-20? I suspect it would eliminate most of your test group from the label of paedophile if we look at specifics. After all, that’s what it means to be scientific. And why 48 people? Why not 4,000? Were they all local to one place? Or were they from a larger demographic? Where they registered offenders? Part of a prison population?
You then state, *In contrast, the prevalence of homosexuality among pedophiles may be as high as 30-40%.”*
Now you don’t mention a date but again it’s from the same body of researchers. It may be more accurate to state that out of 100% of paedophiles, up to 70% of offenders are heterosexual. It’s very easy to gear generalised research toward one way or another, without extensive and impartial research from other research bodies to compare it to. Overall, I don’t see anything scientific in the approach of your research.
Oh and just for the record I’m not a gay man. I don’t have to be to see the glaring holes in this supposed research.
To add to what Mitch was saying, let’s have a look at Trudy’s data…
1) 37% of male homosexuals admitted to sex with children under 17 but doesn’t state the percentage of heterosexuals that admitted to sex with children under 17, which might be more than 36%!!
2) 25%-40% of men attracted to children prefer boys, meaning that 60%-75% are heterosexual (prefer girls), therefore pedophilia is up to 3 times more prevalent amongst HETEROSEXUAL men. Besides, having an attraction for something doesn’t necessarily mean that you’re going to act on it.
3) What exactly were the categories? You state 15 and 20: does this mean 15-19 and 20-24? In which case, anyone preferring to sleep with someone 18yrs and older would be seen as preferring the two youngest age categories. More ridiculous data.
4) States the same as point 2: heterosexual pedophilia is much more prevalent than homosexual pedophilia.
5) States that a higher percentage of homosexual pedophile men prefer boys than heterosexual pedophile men prefer girls. Doesn’t really say anything, only that homosexual pedophiles prefer their own sex more than heterosexuals do, or in other words, heterosexual pedophiles are more flexible in the choice of gender of their victim. Another “statistic” that doesn’t really say anything. Give us actual numbers and a proper analysis can be worked out.
6) OK, so 86% of CONVICTED pedophiles admit to being gay/bisexual. What about those that have not been convicted? Or those that are attracted to children (as in point 2) but don’t ever act on it? Or the fact that 229 people is a very low sample to begin with.
7) Doesn’t actually state how many people were referenced in that “report” – was there an adequate sample size? Or cultural spread?
8) OK, so show me figures. Seems to go against most of the other “findings” quoted here. Which one is more correct??
9) So how many white heterosexual men have had sex with boys (or girls) under 16 years of age. What about non-white men? What about women? Selecting one particular category of person doesn’t necessarily shed light on everyone’s habits.
Another issue with some of the “evidence” stated is that is mostly refers to MEN. What about all the women pedophiles? What if the rate of women sleeping with boys was greater than women sleeping with girls (I don’t know the figures, but it could be!)? More specific data would enable a better analysis. So in conclusion, we can see that not only do Trudy’s quoted “results” contradict each other but are selective, non-representational and in some case actually prove the opposite to her points! I do not support pedophilia AT ALL, but I don’t like people misrepresenting data or selecting just the bits that prove their point!
Sorry about the smiley in my post – it was supposed to reference point 8 but an 8 followed by ) =smiley!
There is an extensive article on this at: http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/HTML/facts_molestation.html .
Lol MD, it’s actually nice to see a smiley on here once in a while, even if it is accidental :)
Nice post. Personally I’m wondering what Trudy’s doing on a LGBT news site anyway.
Sorry ‘MB’ not MD lol. I forgot to type the random letters bit before I sumitted and had to write it up again before I could post.
That’s OK, although the only MD I remember was Doogie Howser…!
Actually I think that Trudy and others not only have a right to be here, irrespective of sexual orientation, but have a right to be heard, even if only to see their arguments dismantled. I am full of admiration for the posts by MB and Mitch.
Oh yeah, they do have a right to be here for the reasons you mentioned, but I just struggle to get my head around why they would want to. Boredom maybe? I think the answer to all their negativity is hobbies…these people just need some hobbies :)
Search me, I’m not a mindreader so I too don’t know exactly why they would want to be here: maybe to display their hatred and/or prejudice, maybe to “save us”, maybe to get the other side of the coin, maybe to advertise how virtuous they are… could be anything. But given that they are here, I think they should be listened to as respectfully as possible, and their arguments should be overturned. Then any rational, moderate, balanced, and unprejudiced reader can decide which side they support. My own view is that when we write in support of LGBT people on forums such as this, we are not actually addressing the homophobes (whose minds are already made up), we are addressing the balanced outside visitor.
” …. maybe to advertise how virtuous they are ….”
Immediately I read that Kitty, Simon and Garfunkel were ringing in my ears …. “And here’s to you, Mrs. Robinson. Jesus loves you more than you will know (Wo, wo, wo)”.
I think people need to look to their own whatever before laying into us. Let he who is without sin, stone, and so on. Glass houses, more stones, and so forth.
I welcome Trudy to this comment forum. She can then read the replies and rebukes and open her/his mind to others’ thoughts & ideas let alone more recent facts and medical developments. Here is an article entitled, “Are Gays A Threat To Our Children?” from just 3-4 years ago from Box Turtle Bulletin that includes references to the facts & statistics stated in the article.
I invite Trudy and everyone else to read it and come back and comment on it.
Re: Trudy’s Comments
I found them very enlightening. I have always wondered why there tends to be a culture of “youth” admiration amongst homosexuals. It reminds me of Oscar Wilde’s definition of homosexuality as “the love of an older for a younger” – a lust for youthfulness (maybe that’s why there are so many gay men in their 40s + walking around dressed in clothes that an average 25 yo should have ditched?). I’m sure he wouldn’t have defined heterosexuality in the same way? There definitely seems to be a strange, large, and (still) taboo gay scene that revolved around older men and “twinks” or “chickens”. I’m quite sure that this sort of things doesn’t exist amongst the larger heterosexual society? Granted, there might be a problem of semantics here – i.e. a paedophile is someone attracted to a child (pre-pubescent). If we take this term as it’s meant to be understood then Trudy’s quotes make no sense – as this research seems directed towards ephebophilia (the obsessive attraction of older men / women towards teens and immature youngsters). Now there I think can be found a valid point when it comes to male homosexuality. In many countries, including the majority of the USA, paedophilia often covers ephebophilia. This is why lots of cultures view our age of consent at 16 law (let alone other European countries, which have lower ages) as pretty disgusting. I know I have lots of American friends who just think that a man (even if he is only a few years older, let’s say 20) who has sex with a boy (16) is a “paedophile”. We here wouldn’t jails a person like this, but society (heterosexual) at large would think that it wasn’t right for an older man (let’s say 30) to “prey” on young boys (16 – 17) – just as they wouldn’t think it right for a man to prey on girls of that age. Unfortunately, this type of behaviour seems acceptable in gay circles – which might do the general view of homosexuality more harm than good.
Philip: “but the point of the argument is gay marriage”. Yes, but this witness was called as a hostile witness in the prop 8 hearing. Why? Well you have to ask the lawyers that! All I can imagine that the witness was doing was pointing out that there are reasons to view homosexuality as comparatively closely linked to “ephebophilic” tendencies (as Oscar Wilde himself stated as being the case, in his own trial).
Mitch – Why must anything before 1994 be “discounted”! Is 1994 the new Year Zero, where anything before that date is invalid? This would make it impossible for gay men to quote Kinsey (which they often do, even if he work has been discredited) as his research dates from the 1950s. Should we never talk about homosexuality in ancient Greece (which was ephebophilic), or any other time? You say it’s because homosexuality stopped being seen as a mental illness / condition then. Did it? I can guarantee that most of the world’s clinicians seem to think that homosexuality is a mental / psychological / sexual problem. The person who helped remove homosexuality as a problem in itself from the American manual diagnosing psychiatric conditions in the 1970s, Dr Robert Spitzer, has now changed his mind completely and said that the AMA, etc, were pressured into doing this at the time by the gay rights movement. Not very scientific – i.e. bringing gay politics into hard-nosed scientific research. Also, I didn’t think what Trudy was offering was her / his “research”, but a list of reputable quotes on the matter at hand. It might be good if you could find reputable quotes saying the opposite… For, the science of sexuality and psychology is rarely “scientific” in the classic sense… and there still remains a lot of scope for argument and theorising. Concerning the points you made about gender attraction amongst paedophiles – as far as I know they would be attracted to the gender that the person is normally attracted to, though this is cery likely the case for ephebophiles it might not be so for pre-pubescent paedophiles (who are mainly concerned with having sex with very young children – and it’s often easier for both female and male sex abusers like this to commit their crimes against boys due to schooling, clubs, sports, baby-sitting, and teaching, etc).
MB – I for one think that the fact that 25 – 40% of sexual offenders of minors are homosexually orientated is quite disturbing, and something the gay community should now start addressing. You mention, like Mitch did, that this figure means that about 60 – 70 % of paedophiles are heterosexual in orientation. You then, though, said that this would mean that heterosexual are 3 times more likely to be paedophiles. I don;t understand that logic – as it’s now commonly believed that 2 – 3% of the population homosexual, so about 95 – 98% are heterosexual. This would mean that homosexual are about 10 times more likely to be paedophiles (though I think what we’re talking about is really ephebophilia, which is still a sexual perversion), and heterosexuals are slightly less likely (than the norm) to be so predisposed. I guess, when looking at the gay scene / community as opposed to the straight majority it does seem that a high number of gay older men are attracted to teens. This obviously happens amongst heterosexual men, as the above research suggests, but to a much lesser extent (possible because heterosexual society / communities make it much more difficult for men to act on these impulses, and the fact that most heterosexual men have children of their own, of similar ages, which would heighten the taboo surrounding adolescent attraction). In response to the fact that 37% of gay men admitted to having sex with under 17s you said that 36% of straight men might have had sex with under-age teens, too. [I know that the age of consent is 17, but most developed countries have age of consent at 17, 18 and 21 - esp when dealing with older / younger sex]. If this is the case then 36% of the straight male population could be imprisoned (which would be about 16% of the total population)! I find that scenario highly unlikely, and something that lawmakers would have considered before setting the age of consent. Yes, older straight men do have sex with teenage girls but per capita as contrasted with gay older men with teens I do believe that there is a huge difference. As for age categories – according to the law and civil society it doesn’t matter how old the offender is, as long as s/he is over the age of consent and the victim is under the age of consent – so an 18 year old cannot have sex with a 15 year old. Again, in the USA (most states) and other developed nations (bar European ones) the age of consent can be 18, 20 or 21. Those of similar ages below those ages would not be older offenders taking advantage of minors. Maybe instead of lowering out age of consent for homosexuals from 21 to 18 and then 16 we should have increased it for heterosexuals to 18 and lowered it for gay men to 18, too? Young people are being cajoled into having sex far too early and there are lots of dirty old men (and a lesser amount of women) out there ready to take advantage.
Also, you mention that there might be more unconvinced heterosexual sex offenders of minors than homosexually inclined ones. This suggests that somehow gay men are less able to evade the law then straight men, which sounds ridiculous. It is also irrelevant, as (something you agree with) the main thing that matters is whether a person acts on their paedophilic / ephebophilic tendencies. We can only ever go on the acts. So the question is: what makes homosexual ephebophiles more able to act on their desires than heterosexual ones? I think this is a very serious matter, and am disheartened at the slightly trivial and defensive responses by some commentators here. Is the gay community grow-up enough to deal with this taboo subject? It seems that there is something in the general gay lifestyle that makes it easier for older predatory males to exploit young men / boys (and, yes, I do think that it’s sick for a man in his 20s, 30s and above to have sex with a 16 year old boy – even if it is the “law” that it’s “ok”). I thought the lowering of the age of consent was there to help boys and girls of similar ages to meet each other – but it does seem to me, from the statistics and the general consensus (and Oscar Wilde himself!) that there remains a big problem of ephebophilia in the male gay community.
Two other things you mentioned (MB: 1) Why are you asking racial questions? Do you seriously think that non-white men are somehow more prone to having sex with children (or visa versa)!? 2) What would an adequate size sample be, seeing that we’re dealing with a very small minority of the population? My guess is that with an issue such as sexual exploitation of minors the figures used in a population sample would be considered large is it were around 200 people.
Yes, women do commit sex crimes against children and teenagers, and it is higher than once thought – but it is usually men who commit crimes like this. Why? Well men tend to be far more sexual active and needy – just look up any dating site and you’ll notice that there are usually about 10 times more men looking for women than women looking for men, and the gay sections tend to be crammed (disproportionately so considering that homosexuals are such a small minority in the population).
AS for other vitriolic comments about “dismantling” Trudy’s arguments, or the “victim-role” ones about “why pic on us”? Well, my answer is – why aren’t more gay men and lesbians taking these issues seriously? Maybe it’s time to stop being so defensive and to start challenging the culture of “ephebophilia” and “daddies / sons” etc that goes on in the gay community. Just imagine if straight men started advertising on dating sites for “daddy / daughter” relationships! It wouldn’t last long!
PS sorry for the numerous typing errors – which is largely due to insomnia and an old keyboard! lol.
With all these facts and figures nobody questions the fact that in the UK we have the highest number of girls under the age of 16 who are pregnant or who have already had babies, in Europe. That these figures are high in the western world in general weither it be the UK, Europe or indeed the US. It seems to be ok with these people that want to drone on about how bad gay people are to conveniently forget about what is happening with the ‘straight’ community. Non of it makes for happy reading but have you noticed that when it is gay people they are branded paedophiles. Usually when it is a hetrosexual person they tend to say that they are a ‘sex offenders’. Clearly to make the point that homosexuals doing it is much, much worse. Whoever does it is wrong and a paedophile! As far as getting statistics, anyone can prove something in their favour if they ask the right people or indeed the right question. Asking 100 people seems to talk for 70million. For most the research Trudy bases her facts on are from people who want to go out of their way to prove how bad homosexuality is wrong, therefore will go out of there way to make sure they ask the right people in the right circumstance to get the figures they want. Most ‘Marital’ or churches will conducted there research so as to get the result they want. There’d be no point in them doing it otherwise because if the real figures came out showing all they believe was wrong they would be in turmoil and know the risk of having to accept what they believe is not only wrong but so out of date they should be disbanded!
Hi Trudy – those statistics certainly ring a bell with me. Yep, they’re all over the internet – just like that fine old study that proved that gay men had a life expectancy of 45 years (but forgot to mention that that figure was based on AIDS obituaries). Now, I’ve done a study of 100 women who identify themselves as Christian and I have to break this to you – 89% were paedophiles! Yes, really. Of course what I neglected to mention was that my study consisted of 11 prison warders and the 89 prisoners in their wing who were in prison for paedophilic offences. So easy, isn’t it? It’d be even better if I had a doctorate to add credence to my ‘research’.
I have NEVER met any specialist (psychologists, etc) who differs from the belief – proved by genuine statistics – that the majority of paedophiles are heterosexual men.
The majority of
“…. I for one think that the fact that 25 – 40% of sexual offenders of minors are homosexually orientated is quite disturbing, and something the gay community should now start addressing.”
Seb, spelling mistakes excused, but struggling more to the content.
As requested let me address the issue that “25 – 40% of sexual offenders of minors are homosexually orientated”. Its fairly straightforward, so I won’t need to much time.
There we go … addressed.
I’ll move on to the space cadet retarded logic of paragraph one a bit later today. I’ll do my best to be concise there too.
“With all these facts and figures nobody questions the fact that in the UK we have the highest number of girls under the age of 16 who are pregnant or who have already had babies, in Europe”
Oh Squidgy, that’s be the gay (lesbian) paedophiles … clearly
Centre for Research on Families and Relationships and ChildLine Scotland:
Perpetrators of sexual abuse and their gender
% of perps % of male % of female
Birth Parents 42 71 29
(step parents etc.) 10 87 13
Children (friends, etc.) 10 91 9
Adult relative (uncle/aunt,
grandparents etc.) 8 65 35
Authority figure (teacher etc.) 8 59 41
Boy/girl friends 7 97 3
Strangers 7 95 5
Siblings (natural, step & foster) 5 73 27
Family friend/neighbour) 4 81 19
Same generation relatives
(cousins etc.) 1 50 50
TOTAL 2,615 80 20
So looking at the figures it sort of blows quite a big hole in the gay paedo theory.
I notice most of the studies Trudy mentions are not peer reviewed I wonder why!
Me thinks said man protests too much about paedophilia, I wonder why?
Seb- I do believe I did explain in my original post the reasons I feel research from years ago would be bias. Research conducted in an intolerant society where the very subject of the research ‘homosexuality’ was deemed as a disorder, would by its very nature, be unable to maintain the impartial view required for an accurate/scientific testing. By your logic, shall we still diagnose women with ‘female hysteria’ because someone decided it was a condition a few centuries ago? Gay men may quote Kinsey as anyone may quote anything they wish. However, if they put it forward in order to make a sweeping generalisation, especially one which they are using outdated and therefore irrelevant research to make then, it can’t be taken as hard proof.
As for ancient Greece, of course we should talk about it, but in the context of historical terms.
I can’t find anything to support what you said about Dr Robert Spitzer, apart from him saying Christian groups had misrepresented his recent research into ex gays. Regardless, homosexuality is present in many animal groups; would you consider them all to have sexual problems too?
Trudy presented research from research bodies but I disagree that it was ‘reputable’. ‘Sister Mary Clarence’ has already posted more reputable statistics that may be of interest to you. They are recent and impartial.
You said *I can guarantee that most of the world’s clinicians seem to think that homosexuality is a mental / psychological / sexual problem. *
Does your ‘guarantee’ come with any proof? Even if it does, all it would prove is that there is still a massive amount of prejudice that needs to be dealt with.
You said, *why aren’t more gay men and lesbians taking these issues seriously?*
Why would you think it’s not taken seriously? The poster made a sweeping generalisation, at best it was naive and at worst it was an accusation that most gay men are prone to paedophilia. If it didn’t cause offense to all the decent people on here, then there really would be something wrong. This issue is a problem in the world at large and is best dealt with in unison across all societies. To claim it’s mainly a ‘gay issue’ is in fact you being in denial, not us being defensive. Attitudes like that, in effect, distract society from the real issues of sexual abuse and delay proactive solutions to addressing the problem. The closer we can all work together as a society, the better we can persecute offenders and support victims of these vile crimes.
Last year a Scottish homosexual/paedophile ring of 8 men were indicted at the High Court in Edinburgh with 50 internet child pornography and sexual abuse charges. It was described as Scotland’s biggest paedophile network. The police are investigating another 70 men throughout the UK. James Rennie, 38, £40,000, publicly funded boss of LGBT Scotland was a key adviser on sex education to the Scottish Executive. He was convicted of harrowing sexual abuse over four years of a young boy that started when only a 3-month-old baby. He also attempted to rape an 18-month-old boy Also found guilty were John Murphy, 44, journalist to the Gay Times, Neil Strachan, 41, HIV positive and a convicted child molester, Ross Webber, 27, Colin Slaven, 23, boyfriend to Strachan, Craig Booth, 24, John Milligan, 40, and Neil Campbell, 46, a married man who led a double life with a homosexual partner. He also ran an after-school club for children. The police seized nearly 125,000 indecent images of children. Strachan and Rennie were sentenced to life imprisonment. The others to between two and seventeen years jail, totalling 43 years.
well, we can’t help any old rubbish being posted on here, but why does an expensive tribunal waste time and money on listening to ill-informed claptrap that patently isn’t true?
incidentally, what have any of these issues got to do with gay people who just want to get married and lead a normal life in sunny Californian suburbia, washing their cars on a Sunday and commuting to work every day just like everyone else? The number of homosexuals who may or may not be paedos has no more to do with those people as the number of heteros who are paedos has to do with mr and mrs average hetero next door in the same sunny suburbia. The real issues are being clouded by these idiots dragging irrelevancies into the discussion both here and in the prop 8 trial.
Uh huh, now Trudy, go find me some reports of heterosexual paedophile rings. You shouldn’t have to search too hard.
“Last year a Scottish homosexual/paedophile ring of 8 men were indicted at the High Court in Edinburgh with 50 internet child pornography and sexual abuse charges.”
Well Trudy, if example sets precedent for all, then lets use your logic to explore some “truths”….
Iris Robinson is a cheating criminal hypocrite, who claims she is a “devout” Christian. By your logic, ALL Christians are cheaters and fraudsters and liars.
Fred West was a straight heterosexual parent. Between 1967 and 1987, he and his wife Rosemary tortured, raped and murdered at least 12 young women and girls, many at the couple’s homes. Logically, by your argument, ALL parents are murderers.
Peter Sutcliffe was convicted in 1981 of murdering 13 women and attacking several others. By your logic, ALL heterosexual men are rapists and murderers of women.
As you can see, Trudy, your examples mean absolutely nothing, other than demonstrating your astounding ignorance. I see you cut and paste the so called “evidence” on statistics about gay men from sites like http://www.catholicculture.org…. real winners in the arena of promoting false studies to promote a so called “Christian” ethos. There are things lying on their backs at the bottom of stagnant ponds that have more capacity for Christian love than these people do. Clearly you associate yourself with mentally inferior people?
Of course you realise these so called studies are all NARTH studies, don’t you? They are neither acknowledged by main stream science, nor are they scientific studies, just religious hate propagandist garbage.
The fact you quote sites like catholicculture.org makes you either a liar, or an uneducated fool to believe in this recondite nonsense.
Either way, you and your statistics are laughable and somewhat pathetic. Come back, my dear, when y9u have some serious science.
What disgusting statements he made.
How dare he even be allowed to speak.
By the way, Trudy, I though you’d be interested…. your rather feeble and desperate argument to tarnish all gay men to suit your particular brand of spite and hate is called (in REAL scientific logic terms at least) a Fallacy. For example, you have employed a Fallacy of Insufficient Statistics or a Fallacy of Insufficient Sample in your first comment. The second uses the Bad Company Fallacy where ‘Guilt By Association’ is used by way of reason. A common fallacy among the uninformed.
Notice the large re-occurrence of the term “fallacy” with regards to your unfounded nonsense?
n. pl. fal·la·cies
1. A false notion.
2. A statement or an argument based on a false or invalid inference.
3. Incorrectness of reasoning or belief; erroneousness.
4. The quality of being deceptive.
Perhaps you should address the neurosis that is apparent in people like you who desperately need to believe such unscientific nonsense with relation to gay people, and why the need in yourself is so strong to condemn, hurt, oppress and lie to make your belief system seem more real to you?
Curious, don’t you think?
Well said, Will. And we must also remember that Peter Sutcliffe claimed God told him to kill those women…
Paedophilia is much loved by the fundies, it seems. It must be a convenient thing to inspire awe and horror in the mindless people who swallow such crap. Let me say it again, the majority of paedophiles are straight men. Hmmm, now I think we should have a nice, big investigation into whether straight men should be permitted to marry women. After all, the fundies tell us that marriage is for procreation so this would be an ideal opportunity for all those straight paedophiles, yes? And Christians – better investigate them to before we allow them to get married. They may hear the voice of God like Peter Sutcliffe and go on some murder spree. Or maybe commit adultery like Iris Robinson. They can’t be trusted see, those Christians.
Offensive? Maybe. But no more offensive or stupid than the made up statistics that have been posted here from NARTH and the like.
In my “Big Boys’ Bible Book” Adam and Eve are drawn, in colour, with pale skins. Seeing as what God made me in His image, and them in His image too, it does follow that He intended men and women to be pale-skinned and fair-haired. My pastor says so too. Instead, nowadays, we’ve got people who have obviously chosen black brown yellow and all skin and hair colours to walk around in and flaunt themselves shamelessly. It’s shameless the way they do it. Don’t they all know they’re going to burn in Hell for their terrible choice? They all eat really weird foods too, and they’ve made all the big shops stock them; but you’ll never get me to say that’s normal, that kind of diet. The other day some of them did something really bad, and that also means they’ll all burn in Hell, because obviously they’re all the same actually, rotten to the core. I do wish everybody was like me: peaceful and loving, and always seeing the best in everyone.
Yes Trudy, they would be part of the 7% falling under the category of ‘strangers’ in the Childline figures.
Could you maybe talk us through the largest category – birth parent, who account for 42% of Childline’s child sex abuse cases, followed by the 10% other parental figure abusers.
Frankly its a wonder the government let kids stay with their heterosexual parents at all
I think its also worth pointing out that its not clear from the alleged research Trudy cites how the paedophiles are determined to be homosexual that is were they determined that way by their identification with homosexuality or were they defined as homosexuals based on the crimes they committed. Also I think we can taken it as a given that its most of this ‘research’ was conducted by examining criminal records with the biases of the public coloring the records examined.
This so-called “research” was used by Anne Atkins back in 1997 when she tried to attack the equal age of consent bill before parliment. The “research” was so crap she was found to have broken the Press Complaints Code of Conduct by using it. This just shows that bigots never die or check their “facts”.
Will # 44 – There are things lying on their backs at the bottom of stagnant ponds that have more capacity for Christian love than these people do.
Best line ever!!!! LOL! And so true too!
Comment 48 – You made me spit my coffee all over my keyboard! :D Of course, the sad truth is that that’s probably exactly what many ‘christians’ thought (and may still think)when they tried to ban interracial marriage and quoted the Curse of Ham to show that black people were corrupted. Mustn’t forget disabled people, of course – the Bible says their presence in a temple would sully it.
Who will there be left for the fundies to pick on after women/black people/disabled/LGBT people? Pity they don’t have a good, hard look at themselves – because that’s obviously where the problem lies.
when I was investigating the legal age of consent around the world for a project at work, I discovered that Apparently The legal age of consent in the smallest country in the world “The Vatican City” is 12……yes, the Catholic seat of power has the lowest age of consent….weird!!!! but whatever you do don’t use a condom….
More CAtholic and Mormon lies then; there’s a suprise; It seems to me that the case is the opposite; Gays are probably 12 times less likely than straights to molest kids!!!
#48. great comment.. it also makes you wonder if Adam and Eve were caucasion (or whatever they might have been) how did we get all the different races of so many colors throughout the world? And what about those dinosaurs?
While I’m on the soapbox just thought I’d remind the haters that Jesus said some of us gays are born that way. Here a video with big letter print to help explain it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QDyCotYepp0&feature=player_embedded
Welcome to a minor view of the type of religious nutcases we gays in the USA face every day.
Trudy, your list of “notable research findings” looks most impressive. Have you actually read all those research papers, or is it just a handy little reach-me-down list that you have lifted from some other anti-gay source?
Let’s look, for instance, at the “study published in the Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy, sex researchers K. Freud [sic] and R. I. Watson” which you cite – and I advisedly say “cite”, not “quote”. The fact that you’ve got the name of one of the authors wrong immediately makes me suspicious, especially since I’ve seen this error before; it was made by someone else who had clearly lifted the citation from another source, taking it on trust that the paper by FREUND and Watson actually said what it was alleged to have said.
In fact Freund and Watson did NOT find that “that homosexual males are three times more likely than straight men to engage in pedophilia”. What they found was that a considerably higher proportion of male PAEDOPHILES had a homosexual attraction, i.e. an attraction to CHILDREN of the same sex, compared with the proportion of male TELEIOPHILES (adults whose sexual preference is for other adults) who had a homosexual attraction, i.e. an attraction to ADULTS of the same sex. In other words, a homosexual PAEDOPHILE is one category; a homosexual TELEIOPHILE is another category. Freund and Watson refer to MALE homosexual TELEIOPHILES as ANDROPHILES. (Sorry about all this jargon, but it’s what Freund and Watson used.)
Freund and Watson explicitly said that their study did NOT show that ANDROPHILES (i.e. ordinary gay men) were more likely than GYNEOPHILES (i.e. ordinary straight men) to molest children, and added that this was a myth that they had already refuted in a previous study.
In his memorial discourse “Remembering Kurt Freund 1914 – 1996”, Watson, whose real name is Robin Wilson, said:
“I would be remiss if I did not exploit this opportunity to publicly correct oft-misquoted research on which I collaborated with Dr. Freund. In 1989, we (along with Doug Rienzo) published “Heterosexuality, Homosexuality, and Erotic Age Preference” (The Journal of Sex Research, 26, 107-117) and, in 1992, we published “The Proportions of Heterosexual and Homosexual Pedophiles Among Sex Offenders Against Children” (Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 18, 34-43). These articles have frequently been cited by fundamentalist lobbyists as proof-positive that homosexuals are more inclined to molest children. This was not a finding of our research, period. What we found was that, among men with a sexual preference for children, there was an over-representation of men with a same-sex preference….In all other research we conducted, we never found that androphilic (i.e., a preference for male adults) men had any greater relative erotic interest in children than did their gynephilic (i.e., a preference for female adults) peers.”
I’d also like to note that those who mistakenly (or dishonestly) cite the research of Freund and Watson to “prove” that we are more likely than our straight confreres to molest children NEVER cite Freund’s 1994 paper, “In Search of an Etiological Model of Pedophilia” in the Sexological Review”, in which he says:
“The most parsimonious interpretation of this result is that the heterosexual and homosexual types of pedophilia are substantially more closely related to each other than to the heterosexuality or homosexuality of males who erotically prefer physically mature partners. Also, pedophilia has little in common with homosexuality or heterosexuality in males who prefer physically mature partners.”
I notice, Trudy, that you also cite “Research by Professor Gene G Abel of Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons”. Gene G. Abel & Nora Harlow observe in “The Stop Child Molestation Book” (2002):
“The majority of men who molest boys (70 percent) are predominantly heterosexual.”
The simple fact is that while ordinary gay men may and sometimes do molest boys, the vast majority of us never do so, nor are we in any danger of doing so. Most sexual offences against boys are committed either by paedophiles who are sexually interested solely in children or by men whose sexual interaction with adults is heterosexual.
Also, view this video: