Newsgroup: it.sociale.scout
Titolo: How Homosexualists Redefine Homosexual Child Molesting - Part II

'Homosexual Pedophiles': A Clinical Term
 
The fact is, however, that the terms "homosexual" and 
"pedophile" are not mutually exclusive: they describe two 
intersecting types of sexual attraction. Webster's Dictionary 
defines "homosexual" as someone who is sexually attracted to 
persons of the same sex. "Pedophile" is defined as "an adult who 
is sexually attracted to young children." The former definition 
refers to the gender of the desired sexual object, while the 
latter refers to the age of the desired sexual object.
 
A male "homosexual pedophile," then, is defined as someone who 
is generally (but not exclusively, see below) sexually attracted 
to boys, while a female "homosexual pedophile" is sexually 
attracted to girls.
 
Furthermore, Herek deceitfully leaves out the salient facts in 
the Jenny study, which Dailey explains in Footnote 23 of his 
article:
 
The Jenny study used this narrow profile despite the fact that 
the study itself found that 22 percent of the perpetrators were 
of the same sex as the victim. In these cases the molesters 
clearly engaged in homosexual sexual molestation.
 
Twenty-two percent of the molestations were homosexual, and 
using a 2% figure for the percentage that homosexuals are of the 
total population, this would be a ratio of 11 to 1. On a 
probability basis, homosexuals are 11 times more likely to 
molest children than heterosexuals. This fits in the low end of 
most valid statistics on this problem. They generally range from 
10 to 30 times. Also these figures are very conservative for two 
reasons. By far, most of the homosexual molesters are men 
abusing boys; and sexual abuse of boys is under-reported. And, 
since there are both men and women in the 2% homosexual 
category, using 2% is too high for the number of homosexual men. 
On the under-reporting of sexual abuse by boys, the Dailey 
article states:
 
Dr. Robert Johnson, in Medical Aspects of Human Sexuality, 
reports: "The vast majority of cases of male sexual molestation 
is not reported. As a result, these young men keep both the 
incidents and their feelings to themselves."
 
The Department of Justice report on child sexual exploitation 
explains why the percentage of boy victims is underestimated: 
"Adolescent boy victims are highly likely to deny certain types 
of sexual activity. . . . They are embarrassed and ashamed of 
their behavior and rightfully believe that society will not 
understand their victimization. ... No matter what the 
investigator does, most adolescent boys will deny they were 
victims."
 
And certainly if the boy does not report the molestation, the 
molester is not going to. Therefore, a very large number of the 
homosexual molestations never come to light.
 
On a Marshall, et al, study referred to by Dailey, Herek tries 
to detract from its relevance by making such statements as:
 
The offenders were not asked their sexual orientation (gay, 
straight, bisexual) and the paper does not report any 
information about the nature of the offenders' adult sexual 
relationships, or even if they had any such relationships.
 
First, the study clearly showed that it was of men who molested 
boys. This in itself shows that they were homosexual pedophiles. 
Herek tries to get away form this by his special definitions. 
The study even went further and showed that the molesters were 
also "attracted to men of all ages." Herek still tries to argue 
that even this has no bearing on whether or not they were 
homosexuals. It certainly can get ridiculous when you abandon 
common sense. Herek completely ignores another Marshall study 
referred to by Dailey, where 30% of the male sex offenders 
admitted to sex with adult males, as well as with the boys they 
molested.
 
Herek criticizes a study of Bickley & Beech referred to by 
Dailey. The thrust of the criticism seems to be that there were 
other studies that were somewhat different, and that the studies 
had little meaning because they focused only on the sex of the 
victim, without determining the sex of the offender. However, it 
has been well established that the vast majority of child 
molesters are male, so male molestation of boys would be 
homosexual. However, the tests do concentrate on recidivism, and 
have no great bearing on the percentages of homosexuals that are 
sex offenders. On this part I would agree with Herek. But the 
information does go to show more of the excesses of homosexuals.
 
Dailey referred to some writings of the homosexuals, Jay and 
Young. The only thing Herek came up with on this was:
 
This book, published nearly 30 years ago by a team of writer-
activists, is not a scientific study. The authors' survey 
methodology is not reported in detail and, because it was a 
journalistic work, the survey was never subjected to scientific 
peer review.
 
Herek makes no attempt to refute this significant statement:
 
In The Gay Report, by homosexual researchers Karla Jay and Allen 
Young, the authors report data showing that 73 percent of 
homosexuals surveyed had at some time had sex with boys sixteen 
to nineteen years of age or younger.
 
Significantly, the other statements in Herek's paper indicate 
that he would not consider the above as child molesting, anyway, 
because the boys were past puberty. The fact that they may be 
below the age of consent apparently makes no difference to such 
people as Herek.
 
Dailey referred to a study by W. D. Erickson, stating:
 
A study of 229 convicted child molesters in Archives of Sexual 
Behavior found that "eighty-six percent of offenders against 
males described themselves as homosexual or bisexual."
 
All that Herek could come up with on this was:
 
However, no details are provided about how this information was 
ascertained, making it difficult to interpret. Nor did the 
authors report the number of homosexual versus bisexual 
offenders, a distinction that the Groth and Birnbaum study 
(described above) indicates is relevant.
 
Herek would have us believe that male on male molestation is not 
homosexual molestation, merely because some molesters described 
themselves as bisexual instead of homosexual. This is false and 
is just further confusion that Herek would like to introduce.
 
The following in the Dailey article was ignored by Herek for 
obvious reasons:
 
Fr. John Harvey, founder and director of Courage, a support 
ministry for Catholics who struggle with same-sex attraction, 
explains that "the pedophile differs from the ordinary 
homosexual in that the former admires boyishness in the object 
of his affections, while the latter admires manliness." However, 
the categories are not completely separate:
 
While granting that the majority of homosexuals are not aroused 
by young boys, the distinction between homosexuality and 
homosexual pedophilia is not quite absolute. In some cases the 
interest oscillates between young adolescents and adults, in 
others between boys and adolescents; in exceptional cases a man 
may be interested in boys at one time and adults at another.
 
It is information like the above that shows the completely false 
basis of all of the new definitions the homosexualists want us 
to use. In addition, studies show that many homosexuals have had 
changes in their sexual orientation from homosexual to 
heterosexual, and vice versa, several times during their lives – 
some as many as four times.[12] Therefore, under their new 
rules, none of these could be considered homosexual molesters. 
It is well known that many homosexuals have been married to the 
opposite sex and had children, and as Dailey points out, so have 
many homosexual pedophiles. When considered together, under 
their new rules no homosexual could be considered a child 
molester.
 
Dailey also goes into another matter which Herek ignores. That 
is the push that has been going on for some time to sell man-boy 
love to the public just like it has sold homosexuality. This is 
a part of the dilemma of people like Herek. They can't very well 
sell this to the public, and at the same time say that no 
homosexuals molest boys. Dailey details how articles promoting 
this "intergenerational relationship" are being published in 
professional journals.
 
The Herek article makes a pitiful attempt to refute a few of the 
things in the Dailey article, but completely ignores most of the 
important things in the article. It is interesting  that among 
the many things ignored by Herek were Dailey's references to 
homosexual pedophile writings such as those of David Thorstad, 
and writings about the "great gays" of history that met their 
downfall because of their unlawful relations with underage boys. 
Why? I believe that the reason is that the homosexual movement 
has a three-pronged dilemma. They know that the well known 
relationship between homosexuality and pedophilia is against 
their trying to sell homosexuality and homosexual marriage to 
the public. On the other hand they know that the man/boy love 
element, promoted by those such as Thorstad, is an integral part 
of the homosexual movement, and that an important part of the 
homosexual agenda is to lower the age of consent, so that 
homosexuals can legally prey on more of the young. They are also 
presently placing a lot of importance on the homosexual writings 
trying to convince the public that "love" (sexual relations) 
between men and boys is a good thing. Another problem is that 
they are continually trying to sell to the public the idea that 
a number of the great men of history were "gays;" but history 
also shows that many, if not all, were also pedophiles, and so 
compelled by their homosexual pedophilia desires that they threw 
caution to the winds and were convicted as homosexual 
pedophiles. In fact, if it were not for the convictions, we 
would not even know that many of the "greats" were homosexuals. 
It is indeed difficult to go in all of these directions at the 
same time. Some of their gyrations, like those of Herek, get 
downright comical.
 
Herek knows that some of the greatest researchers on the 
relations between homosexuals and youth are Dr. Paul Cameron and 
Family Research Institute. So Dr. Herek makes an even more 
pitiful attempt to try to refute some of the research done by 
them. Herek's whole attack is simply based on his false premise:
 
Cameron's claims hinge on the fallacious assumption that all 
male-male molestations are committed by homosexuals.
 
In fact Herek's complete arguments and his paper fall apart once 
we recognize the falsity of that premise of Herek. To say that a 
male-male relationship is not homosexual belies all common sense 
and reason, and is contrary to the long recognized and accepted 
definitions of both homosexual and pedophile acts.
 
In Pro-Gay Bias in Study of Pedophilia, the Family Research 
Institute fully refutes the methodology of the Herek paper, as 
well as others trying to fool the people with their unreasonable 
methods of determining whether or not same-sex molestations are 
homosexual.[13]
 
It is interesting how Herek even contradicts himself. 
Criticizing the FRC study he stated: "The offenders were not 
asked their sexual orientation ... ." Then on the Erickson, et 
al, study, Herek states: "The paper asserts in passing that 
"Eighty-six percent of [male] offenders against males described 
themselves as homosexual or bisexual" (p. 83). However, no 
details are provided about how this information was ascertained, 
making it difficult to interpret." How ridiculous can you get? 
What difference does it make whether they were asked or 
volunteered the information? The statement clearly shows that 
the information was obtained from the offender.
 
All reliable researchers recognize that what the offender might 
say is not nearly as important as what he does. If they did not 
have homosexual (same-sex) desires, and very strongly, they 
would not commit the serious crimes of having sex with underage 
boys.
 
All of the restrictions the homosexualists want to put on 
interpreting statistics, would practically make it impossible to 
make a determination, which is their obvious purpose – 
concealment of the facts. It would completely eliminate the main 
body of available information, which is the statistics on the 
people convicted on same-sex molestations. Going into all of the 
silly requirements of Herek and the other homosexualists is not 
relevant to the investigation and conviction of the crime of 
pedophilia – therefore the records would not contain such 
information.
 
-----------------------------------------------------------
 
Contrary to the propaganda of Herek and his bunch, this 
unequivocal statement is found on the website of The Sexual 
Psychophysiology Laboratory, University of Texas[14 ] :
 
Recent evidence suggests that pedophilia may be associated with 
homosexuality, mental retardation, and high maternal age. 
Homosexuality in the general population is estimated at 2% while 
homosexuality in pedophiles is estimated at up to 40%. [Emphasis 
added]
 
When a Catholic Priest has sex with a young boy, his sexual 
attraction to that boy is indeed great. It is so great that he 
flings aside his deep religious vows and commits a felony along 
with it. This is exactly what the homosexuals Kirk and Madsen 
were talking about in their book, After the Ball, in their 
discussion of how great the urge actually is. When discussing 
how the failure to resist this same-sex attraction to boys was 
the downfall of what they considered the great homosexuals of 
history, they said:
 
When you find a given failing even in a community's best and 
brightest, you suspect it's overwhelming prevalence among the 
great unwashed.  In this context, it's noteworthy that Alan 
Turing, Oscar Wilde, and perhaps Leonardo da Vinci—each, in his 
own time and unique vein, among the most brilliant minds the gay 
community ever produced—all embroiled themselves in serious 
legal trouble by carrying on indiscreetly with young men. Da 
Vinci stood trial; Wilde was imprisoned, destroying his 
personality and career; Turing chemically castrated by order of 
the court, killed himself. [Emphasis added.]
 
[And remarking on the same propensities in so many homosexuals, 
generally, they added:]
 
And on the clay feet of their betters, more humble gays continue 
to bumble along.[15]
 
To the above they could have added another, the great poet, Walt 
Whitman:
 
Although he is celebrated today as a gay poet, Walt Whitman 
began his career as a teacher.  In 1841 he was denounced from 
the pulpit, tarred, feathered and run out of town on a rail for 
sexual involvement with his male students. (Reynolds, D. C., 
[1995], Walt Whitman's America:  a cultural biography, New York: 
Knoph.) ...[16]
 
Even with so much to lose, those "great gays" referred to above 
gave in to their same-sex attractions to younger boys, and 
suffered the consequences. The Catholic Priests and Scoutmasters 
threw their vows and honor to the winds, and engaged in 
something they knew they could be put in the penitentiary for. 
Their same sex attraction to these young boys had to be 
extremely great. It is no wonder that so many of the ones of the 
more common homosexuals, who Kirk and Madsen called the "great 
unwashed," "bumble along" giving in to the same propensities as 
the greater ones.
 
Dr. Judith Reisman is one of the most widely known and widely 
respected researchers on child sexual abuse. She states:
 
This author’s additional research in this area included a 
content analysis of the biographies of 150 famous homosexuals 
which yielded a rate of 67% involving man boy sex. It is 
similarly typical that early abuse victims tend to similarly 
victimize boys at about the same age of their own abuse.[17] 
[Emphasis added]
 
The article by Dr. Timothy J. Dailey should all be carefully 
read by those interested in this subject. The most important 
parts were ignored completely by Dr. Herek. One of the key parts 
he does not cover was about "Victims Turned Victimizers: The 
Consequences of Homosexual Child Abuse," (pp. 11-12). It 
contains a volume of information consistent with the last 
sentence quoted above by Dr. Judith Resiman. These things not 
only show relationship between homosexuality and pedophilia, but 
bear on what many feel is one of the primary causes of 
homosexuality in many boys. Dailey states:
 
The steadfast denial of the disturbing ties with pedophilia 
within the homosexual movement is no purely academic matter. 
Perhaps the most tragic aspect of the homosexual-pedophile 
connection is the fact that men who sexually molest boys all too 
often lead their victims into homosexuality and pedophilia. The 
evidence indicates that a high percentage of homosexuals and 
pedophiles were themselves sexually abused as children ... .
 
He gives six studies that irrefutably establish the basis of the 
above statement.
 
Dailey's article also goes at length into the subjects of 
Pedophilia in Gay Culture and The Historical Connection Between 
Pedophilia and the Gay Rights Movement. (pp. 7-11) He presents 
volumes of information on how the promotion of man-boy love has 
been an integral part of the homosexual movement, and how they 
have worked together to lower the age of consent laws, so that 
homosexuals could legally prey on the young. He details much of 
the "Gay Literature" that promotes the pedophile theme of man-
boy "love." Most of these things were also covered at length, 
from different sources in As We Sodomize America, Relations With 
Youth (pp. 52-77). Also Judith Reisman goes into this at length 
in her article referred to above.
 
The following is from a special report of the Traditional Values 
Coalition, entitled Exposed: The Next Phase of the Homosexual 
Agenda:
 
In May, 2004, the NGLTF [National Gay Lesbian Task Force] 
announced a new alliance with the Woodhull Freedom Foundation 
(WFF), a sexual liberation group that seeks to abolish laws 
against prostitution; overturn “age of consent” laws protecting 
children from adult sexual predators ... .[18]
 
The following is from an article, Report: Pedophilia more common 
among "gays," by writer Jon Dougherty:
 
The Journal of Homosexuality recently published a special double-
issue entitled, "Male Intergenerational Intimacy," containing 
many articles portraying sex between men and minor boys as 
loving relationships. One article said parents should look upon 
the pedophile who loves their son "not as a rival or competitor, 
not as a theft of their property, but as a partner in the boy's 
upbringing, someone to be welcomed into their home."[19]
 
As an example of just how ridiculous these new would-be 
definitions are, let us consider the brutal homosexual rape and 
murder of little 13 year old Jesse Dirkhising, in Prairie Grove, 
Arkansas, on September 26, 1999, by two homosexual "partners," 
David Don Carpenter and Joshua Brown, in their home.[20] He "was 
brutally raped, tortured and murdered -- for fun, for thrills, 
for the hell of it." He was raped at least six times by these 
men over a period of several hours. First, under the idiotic 
definitions of Herek and his bunch, these men could not be 
considered pedophiles or child molesters, because the boy had 
reached puberty. Secondly, even though the men admittedly lived 
together as "lovers," the perpetrators could not even be 
considered homosexuals under the new definitions of the 
homosexualists, because two qualifications for this are not met:
 
They were not shown to have an exclusively homosexual adult 
sexual orientation.
 
They were not shown to be men who were primarily sexually 
attracted to other adult males.
 
Another sad thing about the rape and murder of this little 13 
year old boy is how the media tried to downplay it, because the 
two offenders were homosexuals, as related by the two articles 
referred to.
 
A recent similar case involving the homosexual rape of a child 
was reported in Media Blackout Homosexual Attack, Register of 
Opinion (Official Publication of Public Advocate), August, 2009. 
The article states:
 
On June 27, 2009 , police arrested Frank Lombard, the associate 
director of Duke University's Center for Health Policy for 
attempting to sell the body of his 5-year-old adopted son to an 
undercover FBI agent posing as another child molester. An open 
homosexual, Lombard lived with his "partner" Kenneth Shipp in 
Durham North Carolina, where the two homosexuals allegedly 
"raised" two adopted boys.
 
The federal sting operation that led to the arrest revealed that 
Lombard ... had broadcast live video of himself on the internet 
molesting a child on four separate occasions. Investigators 
believe the boy to be his adopted son.
 
In conversations with undercover agents leading up to the 
arrest, Lombard admitted to abusing the child since infancy, 
allowing several others to do so as well, and sedating the child 
with Benadryl  to make the abuse "easier." ...
 
Even with such a high profile case and sensational crime, 
however, all major media networks have suppressed the story. ...
 
"... We're looking at a child scarred for life. There are no 
words for such wickedness."
 
Lombard , a striking example of the very real correlation 
between homosexuality and pedophilia, awaits trial in 
Washington, D.C.
 
For an online story of the above homosexual rapes by Lombard, 
see the NewsBusters story.[21]
 
It cannot be denied, even under the restrictions of the 
homosexualists, that Lombard was a pedophile. But, although this 
fiend was clearly a homosexual, under these new "rules" of Herek 
and his kind, he could not be classified as one for the same 
reasons that the fiends who attacked little Jesse Dirkhising 
could not be classified as homosexuals under their special rules.
 
The relationship between homosexuality and pedophilia is 
established beyond any reasonable doubt, and those who don't 
recognize it are either very misinformed, or are hiding from the 
truth. The attempt to cover up these truths by the new 
definitions of the homosexualists disintegrates on examination. 
Allowing homosexuals to be in positions where they are in 
constant contact with young people is both dangerous and 
foolhardy, as has been well established by the incidents with 
the Catholic Priests and in the Boy Scouts.
 
[1] 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality
 
 
[2] See the section, Relations With Youth, in the book, As we 
sodomize America , pp. 52-70, on this website under books.
 
[3] As We Sodomize America , pp. 53-54. ../Import/As We Sodomize 
America.docx
 
[4] 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality#Psychology
 
 
[5] As We Sodomize America, supra,  pp. 150-177.
 
[6] 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophilia
 
 
[7] 
http
://
psychology.ucdavis.edu:80/rainbow/html/facts_molestation.html
 
 
[8] As We Sodomize America, supra, pp. 52-77, 541-545.
 
[9] Ibid.
 
[10] See the article, Liberal Revisionists Present False History 
and Moral Decay, under Articles on this website.
 
[11] Homosexuality and Child Abuse, by Timothy J. Dailey, PhD. 
http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/articles/DaileyHomosexualAbuse.htm
 
 
[12] As we Sodomize America, supra, pp. 137, 143.
 
[13] 
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/2009/02/pro-gay-bias-in-
 
study-of-pedophilia/
 
[14] 
http:
//hom
epage
.psy.
utexa
s.edu
 
/homepage/group/MestonLAB/HTML%20files/Resources_msd_para.htm
 
[15] As We Sodomize America, supra, p. 52.
 
[16] Supra, p. 53.
 
[17] Where are the Arrests of Thousands of Men that Gave AIDS to 
Boys?, by Judith A. Reisman, PhD., p. 3. 
http://www.drjudithreisman.com/archives/CALIF%20HEARING5.pdf
 
 
[18] 
http://www.traditionalvalues.org/pdf_files/PublicSex.pdf
 
 
[19] 
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=27431
 
 
[20]
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=14837
; 
http://www.covenantnews.com/dirkhising.htm
 
 
http://www.americantraditions.org/Articles/How%20Homosexualists%
 
20Redefine%20%20Homosexual%20Child%20Molesting.htm
     
 

