Our collection of material documenting harassment, doxing and allegations of illegal behavior on the part of a purportedly "MAP" group is now complete. A second article documenting a campaign of false claims by said group is nearing completion, and will be shared here.
Essay:My Analysis Of The Attacks On Intergenerational Attraction By Cracked.com: Difference between revisions
New essay added. |
m User talk:Dissident moved to Essay:My Analysis Of The Attacks On Intergenerational Attraction By Cracked.com: New title needed. |
(No difference)
|
Revision as of 18:06, 10 April 2011
by Dissident
Everybody hates pedophiles (and hebephiles, of course, but too few people these
days have the slightest interest in making the distinction anyway, so you know what
I mean). Hating and attacking pedophilia in a mindless, knee-jerk manner is a bona
fide trend. It's a trend that is equally popular among conservatives and liberals
alike, which is saying something! If you want to cast any literary character in a
bad light, make him (or her) into a pedophile [i.e., a Minor Attracted Adult, or
MAA, a political blanket term covering both pedophiles and hebephiles]. Just don't
expect anyone to accept that such a character can possibly have any shades of gray
in his persona, or any degree of complexity of character at all. If he is written as
a pedophile, he is evil. He is psychotic. His mind is more depraved than that
of a serial killer, because let's face it, everyone knows that actually murdering
and cutting people to pieces is by far the lesser evil than some grown man who
simply thinks about how sexy a girl under 18 is, regardless of whether or not
he actually does something as gut-wrenchingly horrifying as sharing a mutually
desired kiss on the lips with her. After all, serial killers merely take the lives
of adult women in usually incredibly painful and sadistic ways--they do not do the
far more horrible thing that MAAs do: they do not steal the indescribably beautiful
"innocence" of young girls by engaging in mutually consensual sexual activity
that may bring the girl so much pleasure that the poor naive and idiotic child may
actually have no idea whatsoever that she actually hated it, and had
something so incredibly precious stolen from her! So it's easy to see why MAAs are
hated by everyone, and considered to have no gray in their character whatsoever,
while even a serial killer can be depicted as an emotionally complex character with
arguably commendable traits in a popular TV series on Showtime. Just imagine an MAA
character being depicted as anything less than a total bag of filth in human form,
and being shown to display even an ounce of humanity in an ongoing TV series aired
during today's climate.
Far be it from the usually prescient people who bring us the uberly-hilarious and
usually insightful online zine Cracked.com to risk bucking such a popular trend by
attempting to be any more open-minded or informed about this hot button topic than
anyone else. Which brings us to
by Connor Thorpe describing the "5 Greatest Books With
Psychotic Fan Bases," a list that includes (at number one, no less!) the classic
novel Lolita. Take a wild guess who Nabakov's infamous tome has as a
"psychotic" fan base? I'll give you a small hint if you can't figure it out on your
own--it isn't Trekkies, in case that was your first guess.
As you can see from reading the article, author Thorpe's problem isn't so much
the "pedophiles" in America, who are rightfully ostracized and denied even the
meager right to look at computer generated images of fully-clothed minors if there
is any possibility they might become aroused by viewing the fictitious
simulation of a girl, but rather the the "pedophiles" of Japan, since they actually
have legalized lolicon! Okay, though Lolita was actually about a hebephile,
not a pedophile, and the largest amount of lolicon features young teen girls rather
than little girls, why squabble over a simple term when the one being used invokes
the strongest mental reaction in people than another more accurate term that would
pack far less of an emotional punch in the gut, right? I mean, since accuracy is
rarely the forte of any article that purports to discuss pedophilia and/or
hebephilia, why expect any one single detail to be accurate, no matter how obvious
the detail (i.e., the obvious physical differences between children and
adolescents), right?
Let's look at some of the highlights of the section of Thorpe's article that
presents such a humorous (read: laughable) condemnation of Lolitas
contemptable fan base of evil "pedophiles" and my response to each of them:
"Vladimir Nabokov's Lolita is the story of the unfortunately named Humbert
Humbert, a middle-aged professor who's also basically a deranged pedophile.
Humbert kidnaps a young girl, Lolita, and travels the country with her, until she runs off
with another middle-aged man."
Um, Humbert is deranged? Granted, he isn't depicted as a saint in the book, and
he certainly isn't a role model for any hebephile (or actual pedophile) to follow,
of course, but he's hardly Hannibal Lecter or Michael Myers--then again, the latter
two characters merely brutally murdered numerous people in hideously grotesque ways,
and the unfortunately named Humbert has a romantic/physical preference for young
adolescent girls--I would hate to further besmirch the character of Lecter or Myers
by comparing them to the likes of Humbert!
And Humbert kidnapped Lolita? From what I remember, he simply took legal custody
of her when his wife Charlotte, who was Lolita's mom, died, and Lolita didn't resist
going with him in any way because she shared the attraction to Humbert. Of course, I
wouldn't expect Thorpe to mention an insignificant little detail like that because
it might make Humbert look ever so slightly less vile, and I can understand him not
wanting to take that chance. So it's better to use the word "kidnapping," because
every ignorant, er, smart person knows that under no conceivable circumstance would
any girl on the planet, regardless of her personal preferences or individual level
of experience, willingly go anywhere with a filthy "pedophile" like Humbert.
"The term lolicon specifically refers to animated pornography that depicts
children [specifically girls] in an erotic context. Even more disturbing? The sheer
volume: almost half of the animated porn released in Japan every year [which is,
like, all of it; they seriously love to hump cartoons in the Land of the Rising Sun)
fits comfortably into the lolicon genre]."
Hmmm, yea, the depiction of underage girls in an erotic context, and
acknowledging their physical attraction in any way, shape, or form, is indeed
disturbing. Much more so, in fact, than any depiction of extraordinarily graphic
violence and torture that routinely appears in Japanese film like their infamous
Guinea Pig movie series, or their "pink" films (and no, I am not
suggesting here that the uber-violent films should be banned simply because they
upset the sensibiities of many people any more than lolicon should). When it comes
to the erotic admiration of girls' (or boys') youthful beauty, that is waaaayyy over
the line of decency that no enlightened society should ever tolerate. Bring on the
violence and butchery any day, but leave the "innocence" of underagers alone, damn
it!
Author Thorpe also points out that the large prevelance of lolicon production in
Japan is "even more disturbing" than the idea of admiring younger people "in that
way." Hmmmm, could this possibly mean that such an attraction is relatively common?
Could this mean that hebephilia (and maybe even true pedophilia) is not as rare as
englightened Americans like Thorpe would like to believe? Could it mean that adult
attraction to younger people might be as "normal" as adult attraction to members of
the same gender despite its social unpopularity in the West? Are such a vast amount
of adults in Japan truly so disproportionately depraved compared to us open-minded
and enlightened folks in the West, or can it simply be that the huge amount of
legal, cultural, and social oppression of MAAs in America and its fellow Western
nations causes the bulk of pedophiles and hebephiles native to the West to stay far
inside the closet? I'm sure the thought that hebephilia and pedophilia could be as
common in America as they are in Japan is just too unsettling a thought for Mr.
Thorpe to consider! It's much better to follow the party line of the American media
than it is to do your own thinking or research on this subject.
Here is the kicker from this section of Thorpe's article:
"Though the studies aren't exactly concrete, many do suggest that the prevalence of
lolicon in Japan has reportedly led to significantly increased sex crime rates
against children and teens."
Um, Mr. Thorpe needs to get his facts straight, if that isn't too much to ask of
someone when they are doing something as innocuous and socially acceptable as
bashing pedophiles and hebephiles.
One need look to the Research section of Newgon on
Child Pornography to find
cited quotations from numerous studies, most of which were not conducted by MAAs,
and one of which even dealt directly with the prevelance of sex crimes against
minors in Japan, that make it quite clear that contrary to Thorpe's statement there
is no convincing confirmation whatsoever that viewing erotic material featuring
minors is any more likely to increase an adult's chances of committing a sex crime
against a child or teen than viewing adult pornography is likely to cause an adult
man to sexually assault a woman. I will directly quote the report specifically
dealing with sex crimes against minors in Japan, since the Japanese acceptance of
adult attraction to young adolescents was the prime "offender" in Thorpe's article:
"Diamond, Milton, and Uchiyama, Ayako (1999). 'Pornography, rape, and sex crimes
in Japan,' International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 22, 1-22.
"However, there are no specific child pornography laws in Japan and SEM depicting
minors are readily available and widely consumed. [...] The most dramatic decrease
in sex crimes was seen when attention was focused on the number and age of rapists
and victims among younger groups (Table 2). We hypothesized that the increase in
pornography [in general], without age restriction and in comics, if it had any
detrimental effect, would most negatively influence younger individuals. Just the
opposite occurred. The number of juvenile offenders dramatically dropped every
period reviewed from 1,803 perpetrators in 1972 to a low of 264 in 1995; a drop of
some 85% (Table 1). The number of victims also decreased particularly among the
females younger than 13 (Table 2). In 1972, 8.3% of the victims were younger than
13. In 1995 the percentage of victims younger than 13 years of age dropped to 4.0%."
Note to Mr. Thorpe: I understand that bashing pedophilia and hebephilia, and
denouncing these poorly understood and poorly researched attraction bases is the
"in" thing for almost everyone to do these days, and I also understand how important
it is for Americans and other Westerners to pass judgement on cultural differences
in nations that exist outside of the West that our own customs do not personally
agree with--along with confusing our "normative" tastes with laws of nature--but
please at least show us the courtesy to do your research effectively and provide
citations to back up such claims, even if such claims are widely accepted and most
of your readers do not care if you say inaccurate things about a certain social
phenomenon as long as the targeted group is unpopular enough. Cracked.com is an
awesome site, and it would be even more so if you guys showed equal care for
accuracy regardless of what topic you are covering. Further, the site would be a
truly refreshing face in a sea of mindless and ignorant condemnation if you actually
made fun of the hysteria itself rather than mindlessly joining in on it.
"The message of Lolita is hardly "pedophiles are awesome!"
I don't think any MAA, be they a pedophile or hebephile, has ever interpreted
that as the message behind Nabokov's book. We simply perceive it as a character
study of a hebephile, and Humbert is hardly considered a role model for hebephiles
and pedophiles to follow, but he was depicted as a complex character who wasn't
unequivacably evil, but had issues that were largely related to the way his
attraction base was treated by society.
"In fact, it's pretty much the exact fucking opposite. Remember how everybody
dies and all? We don't know how the translation was handled, but we're pretty sure
the Japanese version didn't end with all the characters laughing and leaping into
the air for an '80s sitcom style freeze-frame."
I guess the Japanese do an injustice to what happened at the end of Nabokov's
novel every time they do a story involving a hebephiliac relationship that doesn't
end in horrible tragedy for all concerned, right, Mr. Thorpe? Oh, and by the way,
not every story touching on this theme in Japanese manga or cinema is patterned
after Nabokov's book. The tradition of society-wide admiration for the beauty of
young girls in the Land of the Rising Sun goes back long before Nabokov's novel saw
the light of publication. The Japanese have never needed Nabokov's "encouragement"
to feel that it's not the epitome of vileness or evil to admire the erotic aspects
of young girl beauty.
"Most of the interpretations of Nabokov's famous novel point to Humbert being
a gigantic collection of dick-shaped blobs--a completely and utterly reprehensible
human being that should by no means be emulated. Nabokov himself even hated the
character, as evidenced by the fact that he wrote him as a goddamn pedophile
[emphasis in original]."
First of all, where does Mr. Thorpe get the impression that any hebephiles (or
pedophiles) anywhere in the world are trying to emulate Humbert when they openly
express their admiration for young girl attractiveness? I have yet to meet a fellow
MAA who finds Humbert worthy of emulation. And newsflash, Mr. Thorpe: the great
majority of MAAs are decent people who do not act like Humbert or Quilty in our
personal dealings with people of any age simply because we have an unpopular
attraction base that disgusts you and much of the rest of "polite society." We are
as multi-faceted and diverse in character traits and range of interests as any human
being with a socially acceptable attraction base.
As for your contention that Nabokov "obviously" hated Humbert simply because he
wrote him as a "pedophile," well that is certainly on target since no individual or
character so obviously deserves condemnation and hatred more than a pedophile or
hebephile, and there is no way in hell that anyone can possibly like an MAA since
it's quite "obvious" that all of us are psychos and monsters who cannot possibly
have a single positive quality to our character considering our icky attraction
base, correct? And also by the way, Mr. Thorpe, are you aware that sexual crimes
against children and teens are extremely rare outside of the home and other
institutions (such as boarding schools) where adults have the greatest degree of
power and control over minors, and that most real child molesters do not have a
preferential attraction towards minors? If real MAAs were as universally evil
and depraved as you seem to think, crimes against children and teens by adults who
did not live in the same home with them would be astronomical in number, as opposed
to the rare crime that it actually is.
Should I have expected better from one of Cracked.com's authors when tackling
this issue? I suppose not, because some trends are just too popular to risk going
against via a modicum of open-mindedness and attempts at accurate research. I
certainly hope that none of Mr. Thorpe's family or close friends--especially not one
of his children--turns out to be an MAA, or they will be quite relucant to ever be
honest with him about these feelings--despite the fact that they didn't choose this
attraction base any more than a mainstream homosexual chose to be gay, nor will his
articles contribute to their sense of self-worth as human beings above and beyond
their attraction base.