Michael Avramovich writes about efforts in academia, psychiatry, and the law to normalize pedophilia and incest; that is, to make them morally and socially acceptable.
From Michael Avramovich, After Homosexual “Marriage”, Are Pedophilia and Incest Acceptance Next? – Mere Comments:
I have noticed that there have been some accelerating steps regarding the acceptance of pedophilia, and I wonder whether my readers have noticed. First, there is the academic foundation for pedophilia acceptance. Although efforts have been made to mainstream pedophilia since the early 1980s, last July, there was a conference on the subject held at the University of Cambridge in England. Among the presentations at this conference were “Liberating The Paedophile: A Discursive Analysis,” and “Danger and Difference: The Stakes of Hebephilia.” (I was unfamiliar with the term hebephilia, but it refers to the sexual preference for children in early puberty, typically 11 to 14-year-olds.) Philip Tromovitch, a professor at Doshisha University in Japan, stated in his presentation about the “prevalence of pedophilia” and that the “majority of men are probably pedophiles and hebephiles” and that “paedophilic interest is normal and natural in human males.” . . .
Then there are the “contributions” by the psychiatric profession. The new Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (“DSM-5”) was published by the American Psychiatric Association (“APA”), on May 18, 2013. The DSM-5 offers a common language and standard criteria for the classification of mental disorders, and is widely used and relied upon by clinicians, researchers, psychiatric drug regulation agencies, health insurance companies, pharmaceutical companies, the legal system, and policy makers. After a fierce battle at the APA, a proposal to include hebephilia as a mental disorder in the DSM-5 edition was defeated. . . .
Finally, we also have the beginning of the judiciary contributing their two cents to this issue. A district court judge in Sydney, Australia, has said that incest is on a par with homosexuality. (Wouldn’t homosexuals consider that creepy?) The Honorable District Court Judge Garry Neilson espoused his view during a trial involving the trial of a man accused of raping his sister. Judge Neilson said that sexual contact between siblings or between adults and children should perhaps no longer be viewed as “unnatural” or “taboo”, according to reports in the Sydney Morning Herald. He drew parallels with changing attitudes towards homosexuals, and said that in the same way as homosexual sex, “a jury might find nothing untoward in the advance of a brother towards his sister once she had sexually matured, had sexual relationships with other men, and was now ‘available’, not having [a] sexual partner.” (Quoting Festus, we might say to this honorable judge that much learning has made thee mad!) The honorable judge then added that incest is only criminalized in society because of the high chance that any resulting offspring will be born with serious birth defects, but added that fortunately in our modern world, “even that [risk] falls away to an extent [because] there is such ease of contraception and readily access to abortion.” As a result of his comments, the Attorney General of New South Wales has referred the honorable judge to the Judicial Commission of New South Wales, and further requested that the judge be suspended from criminal trials until the probe is completed. Don’t forget that it was just a few years ago in 2010 that the upper house of the Swiss parliament drafted a law decriminalizing incest.
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In