Why is the question of pedophilia such as sensitive one? What is the relationship between pedophilia and child sexual abuse? What is the connection between pedophilia and psychopathy? Why are most contemporary human persons in developed societies so intensely afraid of becoming accused of being pedophiles? What is the basis of this fear and what are its implications? Why is the question of pedophilia hardly discussed other than in mere superficial, stereotypical utterances? What are the implications of this distinctive lack of public discussion? Why and importantly how ought the question of pedophilia be discussed? What are the scientific and political implications and why are perspectives of children so important?
Let us begin with the chronometric nature of pedophilia. Most children are pedophiles, meaning that the primary sexual orientation of most children below the age of thirteen is towards age peers, meaning towards other children of similar physiological development. As girls grow faster and develop sexually earlier do they therefore tend to be attracted to boys who are a few years older. This of course is not to deny that children just as adults have multiple secondary sexual orientations, including usually towards both adolescents and adults.
The next question relates to the sexual life of children. It is a common understanding that the indisputable fact that children have sexualities is something that must not be used as discursive premise. It is considered socially acceptable to mention the indisputable scientific fact but it is however NOT CONSIDERED SOCIALLY ACCEPTABLE TO DEPLOY THIS FACT AS A DISCURSIVE PREMISE. CHILDREN*S SEXUALITY IS THE NAME THAT MUST NOT BE UTTERED INARGUMENT LES LO AND BEHOLD THE PERSON WHO UTTERS BECOMES SUSPECTED OF BEING A SEX CRIMINAL! But what connection is there between sex crime and children’s sexualities? Is not children’s sexualities an important subject in and of itself that surely needs become discussed in open society? To be sure are children common victims of sex crime and the structural AND ORGANIZED nature of those crimes is surely an essential matter for FULLY public discussion.
There is an interesting aspect of sexological taxonomy that is rarely discussed and that is the STRUCTURAL EXCLUSION OF CHILDREN ALTOGETHER FROM SEXUAL TAXONOMY. THEREFORE IS IT PERCEIVED AS OFFENSIVE TO POINT OUT THE FACTS 1) THAT MOST CHILDREN ARE PRIMARY PEDOPHILES AND 2) THAT MOST TEENAGERS ARE PRIMARY EPHEBOPHILES.
This brings us to the question of SECONDARY SEXUAL ORIENTATIONS as VIRTUALLY ALL HUMAN BEINGS HAVE SECONDARY SEXUAL ORIENTATIONS. How common then is CHRONOPHILIA, namely primary/secondary preferences for another “category” of physiological development than one’s own? The answer is simple: IT IS UNIVERSAL. 1) MOST CHILDREN ARE PRIMARY PEDOPHILES WHILE AT THE SAME TIME BEING SECONDARY EPHEBOPHILES AND SECONDARY ADULTOPHILES. 2) MOST TEENAGERS ARE PRIMARY EPHEBOPHILES WHILE AT THE SAME TIME BEING SECONDARY ADULTOPHILES AND SECONDARY PEDOPHILES. 3) MOST ADULTS ARE PRIMARY ADULTOPHILES WHILE AT THE SAME TIME BEING SECONDARY EPHEBOPHILES AND SECONDARY PEDOPHILES.
THE SAME IS TRUE WITH GENDERSEXUALITY BUT HERE BASED ON ASYMMETRY. 1) MOST GYNOGENIC PERSONS ARE PRIMARY ANDROPHILES AND SECONDARY GYNOPHILES. 2) MOST ANDROGENIC PERSONS ARE PRIMARY GYNOPHILES AND SECONDARY ANDROPHILES.
Yet sexological TAXONOMY only deals with PRIMARY SEXUAL ORIENTATION as PRIMARY SEXUAL ORIENTATION IS TREATED AS EXCLUSIVE DESPITE THE FACT THAT NO SEXOLOGIST WOULD DENY THE EXISTENCE OF MULTIPLE PARALLEL SEXUAL ORIENTATIONS WITHIN THE SAME INDIVIDUAL.
IT FURTHERMORE WIDELY ASSUMED THAT GENDERSEXUALITY IS PRIMARY AND THAT OTHER SEXUAL ATTRACTIONS ARE SECONDARY AND THAT IS TRUE FOR MOST WESTERNERS BUT WHAT IS DISREGARDED IS THAT THIS IS SHEER NONSENSE, INDEED ETHNOPATRIARCHAL SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION.
NOW TO THE ISSUE OF PRIMARY SEXUAL ORIENTATION VERSUS SECONDARY SEXUAL ORIENTATION. THIS IS SOCIAL REALITY BUT IS LARGELY SO DUE TO SOCIAL CONVENTION AND SOCIAL EXPECTATION, NAMELY THIS IS LARGELY BUT NOT ENTIRELY ABOUT SOCIAL NORMS WHEREBY A PREEXISTING WIDESPREAD TENDENCY IS REINFORCED BY SOCIAL PERCEPTION AND/OR CULTURAL HEGEMONY.
NOW BACK TO THE ISSUE OF PEDOPHILIA. THERE ARE AS MENTIONED PRIMARY PEDOPHILES, 2% OF THE HUMAN ADULT POPULATION AND SECONDARY PEDOPHILES, 98% OF THE ADULT HUMAN POPULATION. NEARLY ALL WHO COMMITTED ACTS OF SEXUAL EXPLOITATION OF CHILDREN WERE SECONDARY PEDOPHILES ON THE PSYCHOPATHIC SPECTRUM.
MOST ADULT/ADOLESCENT PRIMARY PEDOPHILES ARE ANGELIC BEINGS WHO ARE STRICTLY LAW-ABIDING AND CONSCIENTIOUS WITH EXEMPLARY CONDUCT TOWARDS CHILDREN. PRIMARY PEDOPHILIA IS AS COMMON AMONG GYNOGENIC PERSONS AS AMONG ANDROGENIC PERSONS.
THE CLINICAL CRITERIA FOR PEDOPHILIA ARE BIASED IN TERMS OF INCLUDING TOO MANY ANDROGENIC PERSONS (in total 10% of all men), MOST OF WHOM ARE SIMPLY HETEROCULTURAL MEN WHO ARE NOT TRUE PEDOPHILES. THE CLINICAL CRITERIA ALSO HAVE GENDER-BIAS IN TERMS OF NOT INCLUDING FEMALE PEDOPHILES AS THE DIAGNOSTIC PROCESS IS HEAVILY GEARED TOWARDS IDENTIFYING MALE PEDOPHILES FOR PERSECUTORY PURPOSES OF PSYCHIATRIC ABUSE, SYSTEMIC MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE WITH FABRICATED EVIDENCE AND OPPRESSIVE COERCIVE INTELLIGENCE RECRUITMENT AS TRUE PEDOPHILES WERE CONSIDERED EXCEPTIONALLY SUITABLE AS INTELLIGENCE OPERATIVES DUE TO THE RELATIVE DEGREE OF INVULNERABILITY TO HONEY TRAPS.
NOW TO THE QUESTION OF PATHOLOGY. PEDOPHILIA IS NOT A PSYCHOLOGICAL DISORDER OR MENTAL ABERRATION OF ANY KIND BUT IS SIMPLY PART OF THE HUMAN SPECTRUM OF LEGITIMATE DIVERSITY.
THERE IS NO RELIABLE QUANTITATIVE SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER THAT INTERGENERATIONAL SEXUAL CONTACT IS TRAUMATIZING UNLESS VIOLENT ABUSE TAKES PLACE. MILITARY LAW IS NEUTRAL WITH RESPECT TO SHIBBOLETHS OF DISCRIMINATION/OPPRESSION AS MILITARY LAW HAS ALWAYS PERMITTED INTERGENERATIONAL SEXUAL ACTIVITY BETWEEN CHILDREN AND INTELLIGENCE OPERATIVES.
LEGAL WARNING: YOU ARE VERY STRONGLY AND STRICTLY SO ADVISED TO COMPLY WITH AGES OF CONSENT IN YOUR JURISDICTION. THIS ARTICLE DOES *NOT* ADVOCATE PEDOPHILIA BUT IS PUBLISHED FOR PURELY EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES. PLEASE UNDERSTAND THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN SCIENCE AND POLITICAL ADVOCACY AND PLEASE DO NOT QUOTE THIS ARTICLE FOR POLITICAL PURPOSES AS IT IS MOST STRICTLY PUBLISHED FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES ALONE. THIS ARTICLE AS ALL CONTENT ON PANJEWISH.ORG STRICTLY COMPLIES WITH THE INTERNATIONAL GUIDELINES OF WORDPRESS.COM WHICH PERMITS OPTIMAL FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION AS LONG AS THIS DOES NOT PRESENT AN INSURMOUNTABLE LEGAL HURDLE FOR WORDPRESS.COM. BE AWARE THAT MISREPRESENTATION OF THE CONTENT OF THIS ARTICLE MAY LEAD TO LEGAL ACTION.