sexuality

The Reality Of Establishment Child Rape Networks And The Wilful Ignorance That Sustains Them

By M.K. Styllinski

zb

Zdzislaw Beksinski

“Amateurs think prisons are full of sociopaths. A pro would tell you the truth: the only sociopaths in prisons are the failures.” Andrew Vachss

*

“British security services infiltrated and funded the notorious Paedophile Information Exchange in a covert operation to identify and possibly blackmail establishment figures, a Home Office whistleblower alleges.”report by UK’s Sunday Express


A few days ago I found myself in the strange position of watching television. While I enjoy a trip to see a film now and then I don’t own a T.V. nor do I have any inclination to watch what passes for entertainment these days. I’d rather avoid endless streams of asinine mediocrity pumped into my mind. But that’s just me.

However, last night I was visiting my sister and we ended up tuning in to the UK’s Children in Need programme which is somewhat a British tradition. The general public donates to worthwhile causes such as hospice or hospital care; celebrates individual acts of courage, community projects and the like – all centered around children. Many folks spent the previous year fund-raising for these causes sending in their loot prior to and during the live show so it’s hard not to be moved by all this;  the tales of bravery and struggle and the subsequent money raised often reaching many millions of pounds.

There are legions of compassionate people in the UK who give up their hard-earned cash to make children’s lives better. Yet, aside from the fact that it literally relies on the good hearts of the public instead of what should be natural socioeconomic provision in the first place, it got me wondering about how aware we are concerning the presence of widespread child abuse and murder perpetrated by some of the international ruling elite on which I and many others have written about over the last ten years.

How many of those same folks who are willing to dig deep into their pockets for those in need of palliative care and charity are aware of those children passed around like candy by our power brokers; by those within the civil service, law enforcement, the judiciary and business? How many are willing to even contemplate that such a thing is possible and in fact, does take place in our so-called democratic societies?

(more…)

Advertisements

Technocracy XVIII: Occult Transhumanism (2)

 extant-foetus

“H+”  is the Transhumanism symbol |© infrakshun


There are many writers and historians that claim the human race was the result of genetic engineering by a race of “Gods,” our ultra-terrestrial cousins. This is not merely a modern speculation since it reappears in many creation myths, most notably in the Sumerian Tablets of 1600 B.C., the first Babylonian Dynasty. In our present context, transhumanism and their  technologies aim to re-engineer humankind and are, by their very nature, drawn from occult or alchemical principles as a cyclic set of redemptive patterns. Modern science is a reflection of the original alchemical imperatives, established to assist humanity in achieving a prodigal return after the fall. Yet, there are always two streams to this return: service to self or service to others, left hand path or right hand path, creativity, entropy, yin-yang. Learning to discern and discriminate the choices which lead to an increase in awareness rather than an unconscious decrease is determined by context.  And it seems the present context is dominated by a technological ascension that is entropic in nature.

If the reader recalls, many summaries in this series show the persistent push toward group consciousness, group-think, consolidation/centralisation, SMART societies, ecological fascism and the general hijacking of Truth in order to supplant and engineer a counterfeit reality which nonetheless, achieves the required energy – by the consent of the masses. For ceremonial psychopaths, free-will is still paramount and much tastier meal if the decision is given willingly.

One has to make the choice – even unconsciously – to be follow objective reality as far as is possible or to choose to be deceived.

splice_4Promotional still from “Splice” (2009) Warner Bros; Directed by Vincenzo Natali. “She’s not human … Not entirely.”

Since, by its very nature, genetic engineering is social engineering the advancement of GRIN technologies aligned to this science throws up intense moral and ethical questions moving us back into the realm of Babel, the Fall and Atlantean myth:  When does an animal become a human and how does acting as God to the animal kingdom react to this transformation? More to the point, when a new generation of plant, animal, human-machines are mixed with animal and human DNA, how will that transform our civilisation? How does conscience and consciousness feature? According to Farrell and De Hart these implications are defined by “law and jurisprudence” where genetic chimeras will (and by extension, bio-genetic robots) create huge moral mine-fields on the question of “human” rights relating to levels of self-awareness/sentience. Defined rights will inevitably shape our societies and cultures. But to what end?

Under U.S. patent law, an invention must fulfill four requirements in order to be patentable as intellectual property:

1) It must be original, i.e., it must not have been published or patented previously nor be too similar to a previous invention;

2) It must not be obvious, that is to say, you cannot patent a rock wrapped in a sock and call it a “non-scuff” door stopper;

3) It must have a clear and demonstrable function, which, in the case of chimerical life, as we have seen, could include specific research purposes, such as the study of immune system disorders in chimerical creatures with human immune systems, or human cognitive or mental disorders in creatures with predominantly human neural structures;

4) It must be enabling, in other words, the patent should function like a recipe, with clear enough descriptions of the technologies and techniques to allow anyone to reproduce it.57

Under these criteria, an animal-human chimera, even if, say, 99 percent human and only 1 percent animal (or vice versa), would be a patentable object and intellectual property….

….shades of the ancient Mesopotamian and Meso-American myths of the engineering of mankind as a slave race to the gods. [1]

The contemporary Elites within America (the latter-day Atlantis and New Babylon) are fixated on the idea of transformation. As discussed previously we can see that these Illuminist/Rosicrucian/Baconian roots have required centuries long social engineering efforts culminating in a precise set of phases in the 20th and 21st Centuries. The slow establishment of an Official Culture of mind-body addiction serves as a platform by which social and cultural experimentation can take place. We might say there are five main ideas implanted into the minds of the global population:

  1. The idea that the Earth is overpopulated and extreme measures are needed depopulation by all and any means.
  2. Human influenced global warming to create fear and finance; to camouflage cyclic environmental, cataclysmic and cosmic changes.
  3. Human induced Terror Industry to promote fear and finance.
  4. Genetic engineering to save humanity (cure diseases, disability, farming)
  5. Genetic engineering and bio-technology to “improve” humanity

The 4C’s of commercialisation, consolidation, centralisation and control underpin these three main strategies with: a) banking infrastructure predicated on credit and debt cycles and b) the Structural Adjustment Team organisations to implement debt and the maintenance of poverty and war. The final technological transformation and its religio-occult apocalypse care of monotheistic religions represent the “ascension”; a magical reversal of the Tower of Babel moment and a return to the States of both Babylon and Atlantis. A New World Order will rise out of the ashes and the template for a SMART World State will advance a breakaway society. This enclave of self-proclaimed New World Priesthood will oversee a chipped, genetically modified, modernised slave race – willingly accepted. The energy of the mass mind will serve as a mega-ritual of perceived alchemical ascension by a minority of psychopath masquerading as transhumanist saviours.

Will such a dystopian nightmare come to pass?

Well, the future is still open but the window of opportunity is slight.

transgender-symbol

Transgender symbol fusing with Transhumanism symbol? © infrakshun

Accordingly, the transformation of humankind across all domains is currently obsessed with socio-cultural “androgynous fusions” since it is the esoteric masculine androgyny that dominates the global occult Establishment. The engineering of these fusions is operating through genetics and chimeras, biology, agribusiness, entertainment, art, media, military R & D  and of course, transhumanism as the main hub for disseminating the new philosophy and the transformation of consciousness toward the prophesied Singularity.

Or, according to author Joel Garreau:

“… it means that any human being – a microcosm – will be capable of himself or herself becoming a macrocosm, of literally stretching out, via computer interfaces, to control robotic space probes, millions of miles away. The next step is towards true computer-enhanced telepathy and interface, “to rig a distant machine such that it can pipe what it is sensing directly into the brain of its human host. The goal is to seamlessly merge mind and machine, engineering human evolution so as to directly project and amplify the power of our thoughts throughout the universe.” [2]

This explains the Establishment expression of an inverted alchemy and its obsession with sexual subversion, androgyny as expressed through pathological elements of (Nazi) occult bi-sexuality, homosexuality and the now modern PR surrounding transgender studies surfacing in popular culture – often in combination with a transhumanist ethos. This is not to condemn the LBGT ( Lesbian, Bi-Sexual, Gay and Transgender) movement at its core, only to raise questions about its appearance at this juncture and with awareness of what has been discussed. Recall that normal humanity – including normal gay men and lesbian women – are being used to fulfill an agenda that has nothing to do with social or spiritual emancipation. The occult elite are in control of the mechanism though not necessarily the inherent unpredictability. If indeed we are facing a omni-directional engineering of the social body then it is logical that these patterns of sexuality have surfaced throughout history where separation and persecution dominated, or an understanding of sexual orientation was allowed to occur, usually based on higher knowledge concerning its place in the whole and the key distinction between mere difference and obvious pathology.

The spiritual concept of the androgynous man is a symbol of bi-sexuality and asexuality of the Divine Unity – the completed Self. It is a symbol for the integration of all noble aspects not just sexual. However, sexual/creative  energy informs all. Indeed, rudimentary sex organs of both sexes are present in the human foetus – an embryonic androgyny. And as Farrell and De Hart propose, this may be the results of an actual scientific knowledge that man was literally made in the image of the God(s).

Down through history ancient culture across the globe has seen the  masculine associated with differentiation, and the feminine with union. This symbolism was rooted in an elite science that actually knew that biologically it was the male that indeed was responsible for the “primary differentiation” and sexual differentiation, with the feminine or reception as the “default” program  set to “female.”

cybererotica2

The Mainstreaming of cyborg-erotica care of transhumanist “chic.” It is usually a male fantasy fusion, though Bjork’s lesbian android’s (top right) beat Jennifer Lopez’s standard hetero-android for cyber-fetish originality…

“alchemosexuality” was the echo of a scientifically-based ancient culture such as Atlantis which was destroyed as result of their all-consuming hubris, the knowledge was lost along with everything else. But if human males carry BOTH chromosomes and this was applied as a form of “analogical magic” this would be likened to: “…a symbol of the physical medium in which all distinctions are united.” And where such thinking as related to a primordial alchemosexuality: “… even finds expression in the ancient belief that male sperm: ‘was held to contain a particle of prima materia out of which everything was made.’ ” it is in this sense that: “… the phenomenon of androgyny itself is a residue of mankind’s actual primordial state – as is actually claimed by various traditions – and occasionally manifests itself for whatever reason, including the possibility that it is being deliberately, though covertly, sought and engineered.”

Even more importantly:

“…modern genetics falsifies the ancient metaphor in one significant way, in that it is the female rather than the male which is the “default” setting for the program of human embryonic development.

But i[t] also confirms the ancient metaphor in another significant way, in that it is the male that is a “special program” of differentiation, for without the Y chromosome, development would proceed along the lines of the female. We cannot help but recall the fact that in ancient Mesopotamian lore, the “gods” engineered mankind by a chimerical mixture between a proto-human “female” donor and a “god” male donor. [3]

Hence the distortion within the ruling power echelons where a predominance of paedophilia and gay sex magick within military-occult circles comes into play. The idea of the default setting of man is taken as an exclusive Will to Power, the masculine as the “Keys to Creation” rather than the integration and synthesis of both sexual energies. The Fall and subsequent re-engineering of humanity was accomplished when the genetic symbiosis of X, Y chromosome interrelation ceased to indicate androgyny but degenerated into mere sexual divisions.

If the unification of the sexes was indeed a reality in some dim and and very distant past, and the human race was divided into males and females, as also much later suggested by Plato and possibly Aristotle, it reinforces the sheer alchemical ambition foisted on humanity – viewed as Frankenstein by the Elite, a monster to be transmuted – is extraordinary to behold. It seems they have not – perhaps cannot – learn from the past. If individual consciousness is being sacrificed for group consensus and group consciousness based on androgynous fusions which are all rooted in an archaic re-enactment of an ancient Fall and the assumed ascent, most of humanity will flow into that “Great Work” voluntarily.

The only problem is, it is the usual hi-jacking of Truth; it is a trap which will provide a choice for the observer to apply the knowledge to truly SEE or to believe the lie, the latter signifying a return not to primordial androgyny but to primal matter.

Lucy (2014)

Scarlett Johansson starring as “Lucy” in the 2014 film of the same name. Directed by Luc Besson this is perhaps one of the most transhumanist films ever made offering a decidedly “Luciferian version of Creation”. For a fine exploration of these underlying themes within the film take a look at: “Lucy”: A Movie About Luciferian Philosophy” from the Vigilant Citizen website.

We see a strange reflection of this genetic dissection and manipulation across all domains of society. It is a forced fusion of opposites and coerced interplay of group-think and herd mentality being corralled towards a technocratic fusion of consciousness. Anomalies abound with transsexuals cast a drift in a sea of artificiality where once such individuals had a place in society as spiritual channels. Those that were half-man/half woman were revered in many ancient and indigenous cultures as they were seen as shamans given the task of attuning with higher realities in order to maintain the integrity of the community, by a communion with “Spirit.” The last thing they were subjected to was isolation and hatred. Yet, in this culture of extreme differentiation and sexual psychopathy is makes perfect sense that sexual minorities are also hijacked and co-opted for elite uses, subverting minority roles so that narcissistic tribal groupings and endless labels for “rights” and further differentiations dominate. Similarly, agriculture and animals become commodified just as the ecology of the mind and its external environment succumb not to the freedom of technology, but its further constriction.

The promise of technology to heal all physical ills is very real and to be welcomed. Meanwhile, the pay off from that healing is not being addressed and can be seen in current expressions within pop culture. While the undoubted interrelatedness and interdependence of the global populations is emerging as a very real global brain, the ponerological aspects of this manifestation is clear. Art, music and the Hollywood, gloss of cyber erotica, the Nazi roots of Sado-Masochism, bondage and porn is being mainstreamed. It is quite literally, coming online as the merging of man and machine is sold as sexy.


gigerartworks1© H.R. Gieger

Instantly recognisable as the concept and production design style used for the Alien films, Swiss artist Hans Ruedi Giger and his iconic, industrial, “bio-mechanical” art, best personifies the inverted gnosticism as occult transhumanism. It is a disturbing picture of cyborg-alien “eroticism”, exemplifying Satanic Egyptian-Babylonian ritual fantasy. Unsurprisingly, S & M fetishists find Gieger’s art popular. It is also no coincidence that in the final “Prometheus” film directed by Ridley Scott, the “Orion Gods” are introduced as the decidedly unfriendly geneticists who not only seeded humanity out of their very bodies, but were also responsible for unleashing the demonic Alien, originally inspired by Giger’s single artwork: Necronom IV. Once commenting that he initially used his works as art therapy, I can only say rather than exorcising whatever was there, it looks like he became its channel…


According to physics the Universe may be “hardwired” to produce observers so that in one sense, the Universe can know itself through the medium of a complex organism like humanity. This has been called the “Anthropic Cosmological Principle,” which includes four sub-principles. It is the fourth sub-principle – the Final Anthropic Principle – which concerns transhumanism and which exactly describes the abiding rationale behind such beliefs in that the processing of information must be brought forth in the Universe, and once it comes into existence, it cannot die out. This may be true, but it is a huge leap to assume that observers and participants all adhere to the essential qualitative energy of Universal Creativity. There is supreme intelligence of the machine and there is the omnipotent Gods of pre-history – neither of which designate ultimate benevolence.

Spirit is neutral but flows through the polarities of negative and positive. It is this underlying binary cycle of Light and Dark consciousness expressed through group endeavour that holds the most danger: a) through the networking of knowledge without prejudice and with a co-linear intent that it is group conscious; or b) through the development of belief, ideology and subjective evaluations designed to create group consciousness as a template for the future. The latter accentuates contraction, conformity and authority with the artifice of the opposite – the effort expressed that is equal, unchanging and constantly running on empty. It is the uniformity and crystallised “consensus” that drives hierarchical group consciousness, where the restriction of a singular authority impedes creativity and leads to entropy.

The former – a network of service to others – actually serves the self, as it strives to disburse accumulated energy in favour of both individuality and the community; creativity is expressed as part of an holistic organism, where each “cell” is a fractal representation of the whole – a contribution of unique effort which is shared and transformed. It is this uniqueness of individual experience that drives and enriches the network.

Transhumanism, if not presently located in an entropic spiral is rapidly heading that way. Since we might presume that individuals and humanity en mass, represent a vast storehouse of DNA transmission and receivership capability, the inherent quality must define these attributes; it must depend upon our conscious choices to expand awareness and therefore resist lies and deception in favour of group conscious creativity. Perhaps we then become transducers of qualitative energies that demand a transmutation of our inner ecology, thus leading to the potential to change our outer environment.

No intermediate machinery is needed, silicon, quantum or otherwise.

 


Notes

[1] p.96; Transhumanism: A Grimoire of Alchemical Agendas  By Joseph P. Farrell and Scott De Hart. Published by Feral House 2011/2012.
[2] Ibid; p.127; quoting Joel Garreau from Radical Evolution (2006).
[3] Ibid; p.252.

The Z Factor X: Chabad Lubavitch (3)

“The abuse and its cover-up are symptoms of wider political dysfunction—or, more precisely, symptoms of socially disastrous political control by religious elites.”

Journalist, Christopher Ketchum


While the cult of Chabad Lubavitch has considerable reach within the US government what is even more astonishing is the evidence that some sections of the movement may be nothing more than an organised crime syndicate acting as an ideological parasite accruing billions of dollars in the process. Leading Lubavitchers have on many occasions been convicted of money laundering, drug trafficking and connections to various Mafia. [1]

Then there is the matter of sexual abuse.

When you peruse certain extracts from the Talmud it is not an exaggeration to say that many forms of sexual abuse are not only condoned but encouraged within its pages. This may go some way in explaining why is it that so many Chabad house leaders and other Jewish Rabbis have been accused of paedophilia and sexual assault: there is a subconscious rationalisation that somehow this is sanctified.

Indeed, some District Attorney’s allow plea deals that keep them out of prison and off sex offender registries. Some rabbis act as gatekeepers to prevent awareness of the issue of abuse in Hasidic circles as soon as reports arrive at the police. Today there is still a media blackout on Jewish child abuse. Child abuse scandals in the Catholic Church get extensive media coverage, yet abuse from Hasidic / Chabad or Haredi children is wholly absent from most of the popular sources of the MSM. [2]

In Israel October of 2006, Rabbi Yoram Aberjil was accused of cult-like practices, sexual harassment of young women and threatening the lives of the survivors and those who support them. One witness who tried to escape the ultra-orthodox community with her family related a conversation she had had with the Rabbi in which he stated: “I want you to know that your children are precious to me,” he said. “I won’t let anyone pick the fruit I planted. The next conversation will be really painful. I will follow you. I have ways of making you disappear in a hit-and-run accident. I will curse your children. I’m telling you, I have powers. Your children will be orphans.” [3]

In October 12 2002 Rabbi Baruch Lanner was convicted of sexually abusing two teenage girls at a religious school where he was the principal. “Mr. Lanner was convicted on June 27 of charges that stem from incidents from 1992 to 1997, when he was principal of the Hillel Yeshiva High School in Ocean Township, Monmouth County.” [4]According to the website failedmessiah.com and their voluminous investigations of child rape and paedophilia within the Jewish religion, Lanner had been heavily protected by fellow Rabbis and his victims ignored: “Lanner stayed at NCSY. He was not reported to police. No provisions were made to protect the children in NCSY’s care… But victims went public. The Orthodox Union (OU) responded by smearing them.

After initial successes, including a rigged beit din (religious court) run by Yeshiva University’s Rabbi Modechai Willig, the OU’s attempts to smear victims failed. Lanner was arrested, tried and convicted. In the aftermath, a small number of Lanner’s enablers were forced out of the OU.” [5] By December 2008 Rabbi Lanner was honoured by both the OU and the NCSY and given a National Award for his services. The NCSY’s maxim of “inspiring the Jewish Future” takes on somewhat bizarre connatations in light of this fact.

Rabbi Aryeh Blaut AKA: Louis Steven Blaut of Seattle USA was: “… a past principal of a Jewish Day School in Seattle, WA. He was originally arrested in November 2003 for possession of child pornography. He pled guilty in July, 2004 and sentenced on Sept. 24, 2004. Rabbi Blaut spent 21 months in a federal prison in New Jersey.” According to the United States Department of Probation, “Blaut is not allowed contact with anyone under the age of eighteen on the internet or in person.” According to one blog for Jewish survivors of sexual abuse: “… there was no press coverage on this case, yet a reliable source stated that 1800 individuals in the community received a letter.” [6]
Other cases that are almost impossible to find in MSM and internet sources yet can be verified by state legislator and penitentiary records are the following from the awareness centre.org:

  • Case of Rabbi Lewis Brenner (AKA: Lippa Brenner) (Brooklyn, NY) Convicted of child molestation. The original charges included 14 counts of sodomy, sexual abuse and endangering the welfare of a child. He agreed to plead guilty to one count of sodomy in the third degree, a Class E felony, in exchange for a sentence of five years’ probation.
  • Case of Rabbi Yaakov Yitzhak Brizel (Jerusalem, Israel) Accused of child molestation.
  • Case of Rabbi Shlomo Carlebach There is a Call for Action on this case. Accused of several cases of child molestation, and sexual assault of young adult women.
  • Case of Rabbi Perry Ian Cohen – (Montreal and Toronto Canada) Accused of sexual abuse of a seventeen year old. Fired for sexual impropriety with congregants.
  • Case of Rabbi Yitzchak Cohen (Israel) Accused of sexually harassing students at Bar-Ilan University.
  • Case of Rabbi Asher Dahan, (Beersheva), Israel Arrested after being accused of raping and sexually abusing two 17-year-old girls after he offered “to redeem them of sin and evil inclinations.”
  • Case of Rabbi Anthony Dee (Blackpool England; Portsmouth, England) Former synagogue minister Reverend Anthony Dee found guilty of sexually abusing two boys and a girl in Blackpool and Portsmouth, England. This is the first set of convictions, there was a second set of convictions in 1997.
  • Case of Cantor Stuart Friedman (Halifax, -Philadelphia, Detroit, Boston, Los Angeles, Baltimore) Convicted and sentanced to 15 months in federal prison on one count of distributing child pornography. [7]

More recent reports include Christopher Ketcham’s expose on the Hasidic ritual bathhouses and the “Child Rape Assembly Line” published by online society and culture magazine vice.com in November 2013.

Ketchum interviewed one Rabbi Nuchem Rosenberg a member of Brooklyn’s Satmar Hasidim fundamentalist branch of Orthodox Judaism. His job is to design and repair mikvahs which are Jewish bathhouses used for ritualistic purification and cleansing. Rosenberg proceeds to divulge graphic details of systematic rape by spiritual elders within these establishments with such a ring of authenticity that it is hard to dispute.

large_rabbi-rosenbergWhistleblower Rabbi Nuchem Rosenberg, VICE.com © photo by Christian Storm.

Parallels to the Catholic Church are obvious as is the target for the “rites of passage” which are predominantly young boys from ages 7-14. In fact, according to Rosenberg: “… around half of young males in Brooklyn’s Hasidic community—the largest in the United States and one of the largest in the world—have been victims of sexual assault perpetrated by their elders.” Familiar to the discourse of disbelief in the face of authority, Ultra-Orthodox Jews have the same problems when they attempt to speak out about the abuse in their midst. They are ostracised and their careers are ruined. Rosenberg suffered the same consequences after he began blogging on the abuse and opened a New York City hotline for victims. As Ketchum describes, to go against what is seeded psychopathy inside what is masquerading as a societal vessel for spiritual purity and sustenance is no greater example of evil. As is the case time and time again, people will maintain the integrity of the initial message even if the structure that professed to house it has long since gone.

Rabbi Rosenberg is loathed and hated by his own community even feared as if he is a walking contagion:

“He receives death threats on a regular basis. In Yiddish and Hebrew newspapers, advertisements taken out by the self-described ‘great rabbis and rabbinical judges of the city of New York’ have denounced him as ‘a stumbling block for the House of Israel,’ ‘a public rebuker and preacher of ethics’ who ‘persists in his rebelliousness’ and whose ‘voice has been heard among many Jewish families, especially young people in their innocence… drawn to listen to his poisonous and revolting speeches.’

Cut off from practising his religion and ironically seen as a corrupter of Jewish youth regarding the true nature of Orthodox Jewish Establishment he remains an outcast. It is a classic example of ponerology where paramoralism becomes the norm leading to the lancing of those who have the temerity to give voice to their conscience.

Politics, privilege and related sweeteners which arise from both determine an unspoken acceptance of what must be. In the Catholic Church, religion and authority were used in order to in order to gain trust and thus access to the family and the children. In Chabad and Orthodox Jewish circles Ketchum’s research indicates that the goal of of the men-only Rabbinical Courts is to firstly: “… excise the mother from the child’s life,” with immediate effects which may be likened to a parental circumcision.

Just as we have seen with cases of abuse networks with procurers such as Jerry Sandusky, Jimmy Savile, Marc Dutroux and legion of others, it is the silence of denial that such a thing could be happening in the world at large and worst of all right at the heart of our most trusted institutions that allows such practices to continue.

When Rosenberg caught a Rabbi raping a seven year-old boy and intervened, he could not have known that he had dramatically changed his life. Yet, this is the result for so many whistleblowers within the Jewish community and who call out psychopathy when they see it. More often than not, it is the “pillars of the community” and those afforded the most respect and influence who are most guilty, which Rosenberg discovered to his horror. After all, is this not simply a mirroring of organised religion as a whole? A monolithic belief system which purports to represent God and His spiritual rule for living a spiritual life when in truth, it is nothing more than a mask for its opposite?

When Rosenberg took his complaint about his fellow rabbi to the rabbinate in Israel:

“… he was brought up on charges by the mishmeres hatznuis, the arch-conservative Orthodox ‘modesty squad,’ which regulates, often through threats of violence, proper moral conduct and dress in the relations between men and women. The modesty squad is a sort of Jewish Taliban. According to Rabbi Rosenberg, the rapist he caught in the act was a member of the modesty squad, which charged him with the unconscionable offense of having previously been seen walking down a street in Jerusalem with a married woman. ‘But it’s OK to molest children,’ he adds.

Ketchum then explains the reasons behind such actions and what underpins the central premise of this blog by stating: “The abuse and its cover-up are symptoms of wider political dysfunction—or, more precisely, symptoms of socially disastrous political control by religious elites.” Yet, psychological deviance traverses all societal domains using politics as a tool rather than the corruption of politics as the starting point. These are religious symptoms uniquely manifesting within a fertile field of psychopathy, the results of which feed into a further degradation of Orthodox Jewish religious authority – with Chabad Lubavitch at the zenith of corruption. It is no coincidence that this cult is at the centre of American political power brought up on the same endemic abuse.

Judaism’s roots as a monotheistic religion carved out by war, conquest and totalitarianism is simply attuning to its original extremes once again. Therefore, it is inevitable that such pathology will infect more moderate expression of Jewish identity as we have already seen. The same patterns of victim hood and blind faith will continue to imbue authority with Freudian hue of misplaced trust. And since nothing is done without the consent of the Rabbinical Authority the mental instability and social dysfunction will continue to rise just as Ketchum recounts:

Families saddled with an increasing number of children soon enter into a cycle of poverty. There is simultaneously an extreme separation of the sexes, which is unprecedented in the history of the Hasidim. There is limited general education, to the point that most men in the community are educated only to the third grade, and receive absolutely no sexual education. No secular newspapers are allowed, and internet access is forbidden. “The men in the community are undereducated by design,” Ben said. “You have a community that has been infantilized. They have been trained not to think. It’s a sort of totalitarian control.” [Emphasis mine]

The Jewish writers of chabad-mafia.com have drawn our attention to the criminal activities and complexities regarding Chabad Lubavitch and the infiltration into Hasidic clans. Quite apart from the lucre needed to fund the burgeoning Chabad Houses all over the globe, it does beg the question how it’s possible that Chabad Lubavitch can fund an average school intake of 400 students at roughly $10,000-$15,000 per year with thousands of schools the length and breadth of the United States and the world, most of which is offered for free? Where do they find millions of dollars needed for so vast an enterprise? Chabad-mafia.com offer up some possibilities:

“… most of these Chabad houses are located in remote places where there are no Jews, such as rural parts of South East Asia and South America. According to Chabad, the purpose of these Chabad houses is to provide kosher food and free housing to Jewish travelers if they go to those places. But once again, where do they get all the money for all these Chabad houses? And why would anyone want to build a free Kosher restaurant that also provides free housing to the occasional Jewish traveler, in a remote place where there are no Jews?

Chabad houses have been strategically located in areas where there is a high volume of illegal drugs activity. Take for example the city of Tijuana in Mexico, a city where there are no Jews. The Chabad house in Tijuana is the oldest Chabad house in Mexico, and Tijuana is the most important city for drug traffickers moving their drugs from Mexico to the USA. Chabad houses also provide money laundering services to drug dealers and other criminals. [8]

With over 3,600 Chabad-Lubavitch centres in over 70 countries and all continents of the world, it is no coincidence that international Chabad Houses are also strategically located on all of the major drug trafficking routes. One of the policies of the Chabad is to send Rabbis across the world to set up Chabad houses. This movement, known as “Shilchus”, has given Chabad a global support network. There is a long history of Chabad Houses not only being used as safe houses and logistics centres for Israeli intelligence but as storefronts for criminal activity. Investigative journalist Wayne Madsen reported that “Chabad Houses are fronts for Israeli military intelligence and Mafia activities in… Asian cities.” [9]  Judging by the copious crimes by Chabad rabbis over the last decade it seems this is just the overflow from an inner core of corruption.

In Bolivia, 2009, authorities conducted a raid on a Chabad House headed Rabbi Aharon Freiman and his wife who were “… convinced they had been sent to Rurrenabaque, by the deceased Lubavitcher Rebbe.” Amid rumours of drug trafficking and an assassination attempt against the country’s president, Bolivian police closed the House for several weeks. [10]

It seems the Chabad House in the Village of Kfar also had quite a reputation. In 2007 it was the centre of major tax fraud allegations against top level Chabad officials. Arrested at Ben-Gurion Airport upon returning from a fundraising tour in the United States, the “… airport intelligence unit received information that an association linked to young Chabad members was being used to cover up tax evasion.” The main target of an eight-year investigation “…used fictitious bank accounts for money laundering purposes” whereby “funds raised by the association in the past few years for education, aid and charity activities were transferred to ‘straw accounts’ in Israel and abroad and were withdrawn for private purposes, including payments to the association members.” [11]

In Israel, July 2010, Israeli District Police arrested “… three Jewish men suspected of smuggling over $1 million worth of cocaine. One of the suspects, a resident of Kfar Chabad, is suspected of orchestrating the deal.” [12] Four months later, an Israeli Chabad emissary was arrested at Madrid airport after being found to have hidden 4kg of cocaine in one of his suitcases. “Eliyahu Hecht, 57, a father of six who works for the global charity organization Kollel Chabad, was returning to Israel from Costa Rica, where he was fund-raising for a soup kitchen operated by Kollel Chabad in Safed.” [13] He was later vindicated of all charges, though suspicion remains.

Drugroutemap

Chabad Lubavitcher International centres are located on all the major trafficking routes – city by city.| Source: Princeton University/CIA source-Book

During the late 1980s in the United States, it was business as usual with the breaking up of a major international money laundering operation linked to drugs trafficking in Panama and Colombia. Rabbi Sholom Ber Levitin, a regional director of the Lubavitch Hasidic community in Seattle, several other Chabad House residents and Israeli nationals were arrested. The Assistant U.S. Attorney Ron Friedman who was prosecuting the defendants said:

“… they had been involved for at least 11/2 years in shipments of hundreds of thousands of dollars from New Jersey to Seattle …” with $350,000 to $400,000 a week … sent in cash to Seattle and converted to cashier’s checks that were hidden in magazines before being shipped by air freight to Panama and Colombia. […] federal prosecutors in New Jersey said as much as $25 million in cashier’s checks and money orders may have been sent to the two countries, as well as to banks in London, West Germany and Israel.” [14]

The authorities discovered that most of the cheques were finding their way to: “Banco Cafetero in Panama City or to Enrique Korc, the alleged kingpin of the operation in Cali, Colombia.”

What is noticeable in this and many other similar reports is the reaction from Hassidic leaders and the Jewish communities as a whole: Disbelief. Yet, this is the policy of messianic Chabad Lubavitch mandated by Rabbi Scheerson himself. The humanitarianism acts as a perfect cover. The religious intent may be genuine but the means used to fulfil prophecy appears to be without limit; yet another example of “the ends justify the means.” What makes it so easy is wilful blindness and inability to believe.

Some of the reactions to Chabad corruption:

“ ‘When I heard this, I couldn’t believe it,’ said Rabbi Anson Laytner, director of the Jewish Federation’s Community Relations Council. “ ‘This is totally out of keeping from the man that I know,’ he said. ‘To my mind he is a scholar and a very spiritual person, a community activist in terms of helping people in need.’ Levitin, the father of nine children, founded the Chabad House in the early 1970s. It is known as a place where Jewish people can seek emergency housing, food or money and receive outreach services. Several hundred Hasidic Jews live in Seattle, most in the area of Chabad House.’ ” [15]

That is not to say that there are not indeed great drug “outreach” centres that provide valuable outposts for care and support. Yet, there also remains strong evidence that many locations are anything but. Such is the nature of religious ponerisation: the genuine exist side by side with the pathological, the former proving a useful in denying the existence of the latter.

Rabbi Ronald Greenwald was a major example of political power meets Jewish mafia. Known to do business with mafia figures and the criminal underworld it was a coup d’état for such a man when offered a position in Richard Nixon’s administration allowing him to protect his mafia friends business interests and line his own pockets:

“Greenwald was a major player in CREEP, the re-election campaign for Richard Nixon in 1972. Greenwald was used heavily by Nixon and other Republicans to gain the Jewish vote, which he doubled for Nixon during that election… in the state of New York. Soon, the rabbi was given a post as an “advisor” to Nixon on “Jewish poverty programs,” a post which certainly made some snicker at the time, though it was clear that Nixon owed Greenwald, and the rabbi made quick use of his new found powers. He used his power to protect the mafia’s bilking of Medicaid programs and other crimes that were never investigated by the authorities. His post as head of the “Jewish poverty” initiative permitted him to shield those involved with such financial scams, as well as call off any and all FBI investigations of his friends. Part of the rise of Jewish mafia groups was the protection afforded it by Greenwald’s political connections. [16]

As we have seen, longstanding ties between Russian-Zionist oligarchs have also been well documented. Russian Jews were never disengaged from Jewish philanthropy. Throughout the 1990s, the oligarchs who made money quickly and in great quantities invested in resuscitating Jewish communal life, from establishing the Russian Jewish Congress, to building synagogue and community centres and sponsoring Chabad Lubavitch missions throughout the former Soviet Union. Indeed, it seems that the cult’s reach has overtaken mainstream Judaism and: “…continues to boom in Russia, dominating the Jewish scene in every Russian city.” [17]

David Shneer professor of History at Denver University recounts what he heard while attending a World Union for Progressive Judaism conference in Moscow: “I heard stories about Reform rabbis being driven out of their synagogues by Chabadniks, about how Chabad uses its cozy relationship with the federal government to take over Jewish institutions around the country. To the Union of Progressive Judaism, Chabad sounded like Al Capone’s mafia of 1920s Chicago.” Shneer is dismissive of this, putting it down to the fact that: “Chabad was already building an underground infrastructure for Jewish life in the Soviet Union” in the 1980s and believes it was more a product of the Chabad faithful’s work ethic and dedication than any nefarious designs for political power.

This seems woefully naive in respect of their longstanding association with crime, their messianic beliefs and racist values. It does explain why so much of the Jewish community is unaware of the danger that such extremism poses to their religion. It represents the same ignorance and naivety that exists in contemporary society about the nature of power brokers in general. No one is exempt from the effects of psychopathy “chosen” or not.

Away from media fears of anti-Semitism, the Russian, Ukrainian Mafia and the Jewish mafia are fairly synonymous. Scores of anti-Zionists in Russia have been murdered by car bombs or other devices, and none of the cases have been solved. The massive oil and mineral wealth in the country is just too big a bonanza and acts as a major ideological funding resource for Zionists and Israel. To keep the monopoly on Russia’s resources and the exploitation tributaries into other countries open the Russian Mafia has eclipsed other crime groups by becoming the most ruthless and cold blooded. There is no code of honour regarding other Mafia clans or families. They will kill men, women and children without hesitation while embarking on any methods suitable to remain ahead of the field. In other words, the Russian-Jewish Mafia is the closest you can get to the embodiment of the collective psychopath in crime.

With no conscience or codes, no limits need apply.

See also: Orthodox Advocates Push for Sex Abuse Reform in New York  |   In the Name of the Father Part I

 


Notes

[1] Internet website failedmessiah.com run by an ex-Lubavitcher has an enormous archive of Chabad crimes going back several years including child labour, sexual abuse, paedophilia and drug trafficking.[2] ‘Brooklyn DA Launches Push to Stop Sex Abuse in Haredi Community’ – Brooklyn DA Charles Hynes has 19 actives cases in haredi community. April 01, 2009.
[3] ‘Not-so-saintly Rabbi in Netivot’By Tamar Rotem , Haaretz, October 12 2006.
[4] ‘Rabbi Convicted of Sexual Abuse Is Freed on Bail Pending Appeal’ By Ronald Smothers, The New York Times, October 12, 2002.
[5] ‘OU-NCSY Honors Child Sexual Abuser Rabbi Baruch Lanner’s Chief Enabler – Committee Members Include Cream Of Modern Orthodox Leadership’ failedmessiah.com, December 2008.
[6] ‘Jewish Survivors of Sexual Abuse Speak Out’ theawarenesscenter.org.
[7] Ibid.
[8] http://www.chabad-mafia.com
[9] ‘Chabad House: Terror, Ecstasy, Heroine, Prostitution, Espionage & Money Laundry’ by Wayne Madsen, November 28 2008. The waynemadsenreport.com “In March 1989, U.S. law enfocement rounded up a criminal network in Seattle, Los Angeles, New Jersey, Colombia, and Israel that involved a Chabad House that was involved in money laundering and currency violations.”
[10] ‘Bolivian policemen close local Chabad house’ By Matthew Wagner, The Jerusalem Post, April 23, 2009.
[11] ‘Senior Chabad official suspected of evading millions in taxes’”Man arrested at Ben-Gurion Airport upon returning from fundraising tour in US. Simultaneously, dozens of detectives raid Kfar Chabad, detain several people for questioning.” By Eli Senyor, Israel News November 14, 2007.
[12] ‘Tel Aviv – Three Arrested in Drug Bust Smuggling $1M Worth of Cocaine’ http://www.vosizneias.comvia Haaretz, July 8 2010.
[13] ‘Israeli Chabad emissary nabbed in Madrid with 4kg of cocaine’ Friends of the arrested man say he was fooled into smuggling the cocaine as he was returning to Israel after a fund-raising trip to Costa Rica. By Eli Ashkenazi, Haaretz, Dec.07, 2010. | ‘Jailed Fundraiser is Vindicated’ http://www.collive.com/Jan 27, 2012.
[14] ‘Seattle Rabbi is Arrested 13 Acussed of an International Plot to Launder Money’ By Steve Miletich, Seattle PI, March 19, 1988. Section: News, Page: A1. http://www.seattlepi.com/archives/1988/8801080982.asp.
[15] Ibid.
[16] ‘The Judeo-Russian Mafia: From the Gulag to Brooklyn to World Dominion’, by Y M. Raphael Johnson, PH.D. Barnes Review, May 27, 2006,[17] ‘Why Chabad Excels in Russia, And Why Reform Judaism Doesn’t’ by David Shneer, April 16, 2007, jewcy.com.

In the Name of the Father II: The Pink Church?

“At the Vatican, a significant number of gay prelates and other gay clerics are in positions of great authority. They may not act as a collective but are aware of one another’s existence. And they inhabit a secretive netherworld, because homosexuality is officially condemned … For gay clerics at the Vatican, one fundamental condition of their power, and of their priesthood, is silence, at least in public, about who they really are.”

Michael Joseph Gross, The Vatican’s Secret Life


NBlHMRg© infrakshun

By the end of 2002, some 1,200 priests had been accused of abuse nationwide with millions of dollars of compensation being paid to victims. Although five US prelates resigned in the ensuing maelstrom, this is a rather weak result when set against the sheer scale of abuse. The same story has been repeated in Europe accusations of which led to prosecutions and a sprinkling of cases where evidence was lacking. Bishops from Argentina, Germany, Ireland, Poland, Wales, Scotland, Canada, Switzerland and Austria were also forced out of the church. More than 80 per cent of the church’s victims were male.

It is worth noting that Catholic Church in Ireland has been particularly high up on the league tables of general crimes and conspiratorial wrangling. Humiliation, terror, violent rape and long term molestation matched the US experience when four decades of abuse by 21 priests at the Ferns diocese in the East Ireland town of Wexford was discovered. [1] The practice of moving priests away from positions which had become “unfriendly” for abuse, led to the molesters being placed in posts at schools or other local parishes. This was followed by allegations against a total of 27 priests who served in the archdiocese of Tuam, though six are now dead. Eight clerics left the priesthood in Tuam “after a ‘reasonable suspicion’ that child abuse had taken place was established. Three clerics have already been convicted of horrific child sex abuse charges. The earliest case revealed… date[d] back to 1940.”  Other claims against seven priests from other dioceses were also lodged. [2]

An April 2005 report in The New York Times gave details about a three-member panel appointed by the Irish government, showed that the Catholic Church hierarchy in Ireland: “… was only one part of a system that enabled cover-ups allowing known sexual predators to retain their positions within the church – and their access to young victims.”

The report continued:

“Before 1990, the panel found, the police were reluctant to investigate claims of sexual abuse by the clergy because they were fearful of challenging the privileged position of Roman Catholic Church authorities.
Most schools in Ireland are run by the Catholic Church, so even lay teachers found it difficult to sound alarms. In addition, public health authorities failed to follow up on some accusations of abuse and cut short other inquiries.
For nearly three years, the commission, led by a former Supreme Court judge, heard more than 100 accusations of abuse against 26 priests over a 40-year period in one diocese, Ferns, on Ireland’s southeast coast.

One-fifth of the report’s 271 pages are taken up by testimony, often verbatim and frequently explicit, from the victims. It includes accounts of priests at a Catholic boarding school who measured boys’ penises at night, of boys who were forced to perform oral sex on priests and of girls who were molested during confession, one even on a church altar.

An investigation of 60 accusations of abuse in the Dublin archdiocese began this week, and a public debate has begun about whether to end the Catholic Church’s role in the Irish education system. About 95 per cent of Ireland’s elementary schools are state-financed but run by Catholic authorities.” [3]

article_1231180_07608704000005D

In April 2002, Bishop Wilton Gregory, president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and other Church leaders finally summoned by the Pope told a news conference that they had all signed a letter vowing that: “we stand ready to take the steps needed to strengthen our past resolve and to keep children and young people safe for the future and to help heal those so tragically hurt by this abuse.” Obviously this was due to media pressure rather than any sudden development of conscience. Despite this attendance they felt that sexual predation by “men of God” did not merit a “zero tolerance” approach, although a handful of archdiocese took up the gauntlet.

Overall, the rules fell way short and once again, harked back to the same rapid back-peddling enacted by Ratzinger and Cardinal Law that prolonged the cover-up as a whole. A zero tolerance policy and a national policy on dealing with allegations of sexual abuse was formally agreed – on paper at least – at a U.S. Conference of Bishops in late June 2002. However, by June 2005, while setting aside a welcome $1 million to “partially finance a broad study of the causes of abuse within the nation’s largest religious denomination,” considerable tinkering with the wording of the national policy had taken place resulting in what many believe to be a somewhat diluted version. One leading victim advocacy organization said these new changes approved by the bishops weakened the abuse policies, first adopted in 2002. But the bishops, seemingly overjoyed by their “decisive response” dismissed the critics’ fears with Cardinal Francis E. George of Chicago, viewing such criticism issuing only from the “enemies of the church.”

Despite ostensible improvements in policy (which appear open to erosion) many critics cite the Church’s refusal to publicly identify all abusive priests; the failure to seek special penalties for bishops who abused minors or for bishops who failed to remove abusive priests from the ministry as yet more reasons to distrust the motives of Catholic Church hierarchy. Church bureaucracy and the implementation of waivers via their Statutes of limitations, along with the aforementioned revisions in national policies have caused serious concern among former victims: “George, the vice president of the bishops conference and the bishops’ lead negotiator with the Vatican on sexual abuse policy, said he did not believe the proposed revisions would lead to any change in the way bishops handle allegations against priests. And, he said, the National Review Board’s status would not change. He said that the board was never independent of the bishops and that all appointments to national posts by the bishops’ conference are already vetted by local bishops.” [4]

Did the rot not set in precisely due to the fact that there was vetting biased towards preferences and proclivities? George seemed to be celebrating the fact of the old boy’s network in action. An independent review board consisting of a mix of priests, theologians and civic representatives was obviously too threatening.

Reports from 2005 – 2007 found that hundreds of priests accused of abuse had been moved from country to country, allowing them to start new lives in unsuspecting communities while continuing to work in church ministries. Other findings reported in 2002 identified 200 cases involving clergy who had tried to elude law enforcement. Many priests remained free in one country while facing on-going criminal inquiries, arrest warrants or convictions in another. The research found that “Although most runaway priests remain in the church and should be easier to locate than other fugitives, police and prosecutors often fail to take basic steps to catch them. Dozens of priests who are no longer eligible to work in the United States have found sanctuary abroad.” [5]

It is also the fantasies of the “flock” that exacerbate the problem of bringing those responsible to justice. Many cannot bring themselves to accept that the dear old white, wispy-haired Reverend may have sat their niece or nephew on his knee for reasons diametrically opposite to goodness and service. However, investigations have been carried out where priests have been wholly innocent of any wrong doing. Accusations do seem to have the same effect of instantaneous guilt. Though looking at the history so far, the prevalence of the guilty far outweighs those who have been wrongfully accused. The case of Rev. Bishop Howard Hubbard of Albany’s Diocese in New York, who was cleared of any wrongdoing with overwhelming support of his congregation, may be a case in point, or it may be more evidence of primary psychopathy.

com0403f

Rev. Bishop Howard Hubbard

From his staunchly Catholic and conservative stronghold the backing comes from what his congregation say is Hubbard’s consistent example that has shown in his work for the poor and oppressed. Indeed, in Rev. Hubbard’s own words: “I stand before you today with a clear conscience,”… “I am at peace with God and within myself, because there is absolutely no truth to the allegations which have been levelled against me.” [6] And there many members of Albany’s public who were not so quick to defend the priest. Nonetheless, there are still a host of questions to be answered which may prove to have a bearing on the Reverend’s denials.

Andy Zalay came forward with:

“… allegations that his brother Tom, who committed suicide in 1978, had a sexual relationship with Bishop Hubbard. On Friday, 42-year-old Anthony Bonneau said he was paid for sex by Hubbard.” […] Catholic Agnes Bopp said, ‘It’s terrible. The bishop is the most wonderful person in the world. He is the best bishop we’ve ever had.’” [7]

Born-again Christian, Anthony Bonneau, finally spoke publicly in opposition to the tide of support for Hubbard, whom he called “a Washington Park predator.” Bonneau claimed to have been a 16-year-old runaway “when the Albany bishop twice paid him for sex in Albany’s Washington Park. Bonneau told the Times-Union that he recognized Hubbard as one of his johns about ten years ago when he saw the bishop on television. At the time, he said he told only his wife.” [8]Like Andy Zalay, Bonneau had no interest in pursuing allegations to claim compensation. It was Hubbard’s public statement of denials which compelled him to come forward. His motivation was “out of a sense of Christian duty in hopes of protecting other children.”

Hubbard always remained adamant that he was innocent of the allegations made against him. What casts a shadow over his now successful quest to clear his name is the strange death of Fr. John Minkler who was found dead at his home on Sunday, February 15, 2004. Two days before, the dead priest had taken part in a television news programme which explored his own 1995 report addressed to New York’s Cardinal John J. O’Connor. What was interesting about this report was the fact that it contained information regarding “a ring of homosexual Albany priests.” This included Bishop Howard Hubbard’s alleged long-term homosexual relationships with two younger priests.

Journalist Paul Likoudis, writing for The Wanderer (an online Newspaper of the National Catholic Weekly) had worked closely with Fr. John Minkler for 13 years to “expose the corrupt clerical culture in Albany.” Minkler was one of four priests who provided the bulk of the chancery “inside information” for The Wanderer’s 1991, ten-week series, “Agony in Albany.” He related how, in his view, the death of Minkler was far from coincidental. He was certainly in the position to know, having been closely acquainted with the deceased.

abuse-victims

photos of eight victims out of many thousands

The story begins with the Priest returning from a retreat. He had been ordered to the Chancery for an urgent meeting by his friend and colleague Fr. Kenneth Doyle, Albany diocesan spokesman and a civil and canon lawyer. Minkler was presented with an affidavit by Doyle where it was declared that: “…he never wrote the letter to O’Connor; that he had never spoken with attorney John Aretakis (who handed out two copies of the letter to reporters, some of whom already had it) — which was true; that he had never made such allegations against Hubbard; and that he had “never, in writing or otherwise, communicated with the Archdiocese of New York regarding such allegations.”

The affidavit concluded:

“I make this statement of my own free will and I know that making a false statement is a crime.” Contrary to Fr. Minkler’s recollection to this reporter, made six hours after his visit to the chancery, Hubbard told reporters at a press conference after Minkler’s death was reported: “Fr. Minkler made an appointment to see me and he told me that he did not author the letter, and he wanted to be with me face to face and to assure me that he had not written anything to Cardinal O’Connor about me. He did not know the priests that were named in the letter, and he did not know how his name got associated with the letter.”

The meeting with Doyle was very brief, and he only saw Hubbard from a hallway, Minkler told this reporter, “Fr. Doyle had this disclaimer all made out, and he said, ‘Sign it’. “I signed it with mental reservations, and now I’m going to have to go to Confession down in New York, because I can’t go in this diocese,” Minkler said. [9] [Emphasis mine]

However, Likoudis relates how Minkler, one of the Bishop’s major detractors “sounded scared” during their Friday evening conversation. The cause of this fear stemmed from the disclosure of the letter he had been requested to write to Cardinal O’Connor in June 10, 1995 and how he feared it would be prove “disastrous” for him. The Priest had worked for the Cardinal as a private secretary when O’Connor was head of the military vicariate. Apprehensive about a scheduled meeting with Rev. Hubbard on February 16th Minkler had contacted Likoudis for advice:  “I suggested that he pre-empt the meeting by holding his own press conference ‘and let everything out.’ His response was that if he did that, ‘I’d be dead.’”

The claims of abuse by a select group of priests under the Albany’s Hubbard and Rochester’s Bishop Matthew Clark had been circulating for some time. In confiding to Likoudis, Minkler also mentioned that O’Connor had “told him to prepare a brief on Hubbard that he would personally turn over to Pope John Paul II.” According to Minkler: “O’Connor, during a visit to the Vatican made a personal appeal to John Paul II to remove both Hubbard and Clark, and the Holy Father told O’Connor, “There’s nothing I can do.”

The majority of the letter – which included names – concentrated on allegations of recruiting homosexual men to the diocesan priesthood while at the same time turning away heterosexual men from applying; recruiting seminarians from other dioceses who had been reported and fired for homosexual activity; a kind of homosexual nepotism with solicitations from former or present “lovers” for the priesthood. The letter also focused on allegations that: “doctors and other professional health care workers had reported seeing AIDS patients who claimed they had relationships with Albany priests…”  Hubbard featured prominently in the letter where it was stated that he had long-term, homosexual relations with two young priests. According to Likoudis, Minkler also “provided names and proclivities of the homosexual priests in the diocese.” [10]

Fr. Joseph F. Wilson of the Diocese of Brooklyn spoke with Fr. Minkler by telephone on the evening of his death and found that he had “no reservations whatsoever about his state of mind when I finished talking to him that night.” As Paul Likoudis mentioned, Fr. Minkler was a “trusted source of inside information in the Diocese of Albany” … critical of Bishop Howard Hubbard.” The cause of death was a heart attack, though there appears to have been some confusion as to whether it was initially a suicide.


“A disproportionate number of homosexuals are being recruited into our seminaries. I know of one seminary, where two years ago, 60 percent of the students identified themselves as “gay”, 20 percent were confused about their sexual identity, and only 20 percent considered themselves to be heterosexual.”

– Pastor Ignotus, ‘What are we Advertising?’ The Tablet, April 24th 1999


Michael J. Rose of online journal crux.com informs us of another suspicious death from 1998 and the subject of one of the most extensive FBI investigations in Wisconsin history. The crime involved a Fr. Alfred Kunz who was murdered at his rural parish from a slice to the throat with a razor blade. The priest had bled to death before being discovered the following morning. Kunz, an accomplished canon lawyer: “… investigated homosexual corruption in the Diocese of Springfield, Illinois. Less than two years after the death of Fr. Kunz, Springfield’s Bishop Daniel Ryan resigned after Frank Bergen, a former male prostitute, identified the bishop as one of his regular high-paying clients for 11 years, going so far as to describe in detail the bishop’s private residence. Bishop Ryan, however, steadfastly denied that charge and others for years before he resigned.” [11]

Either way, Hubbard is fully exonerated while the puzzle remains. The priest’s alleged promotion of a homosexual agenda or his opposition to the “zero tolerance” policy can only heighten the mystery surrounding Minkler’s death, which was in the middle of seeking reformative changes in the Albany diocese. Given that two of the three accusers against the bishop are dead – questions will naturally remain. The gay-friendly reputation of the Diocese of Albany and of neighbouring Rochester is not the problem. The circumstances of Minkler’s death set against a history of global homosexual and/or paedophile rings in the Church suggests deception and cover-up that begins to relate to a wider macro-social pattern.

Bishop Hubbard and others of his ilk may be exactly as they say they are – men with a clear conscience. We must then look at why the persistent accusations keep returning and with substantial cause. If nothing else, the Hubbard case does show how difficult it is to restore trust when such an institution remains shrouded in secrecy and lies.

Most theology historians worth their salt will tell you that Christianity has been replete with homosexual priests. A high proportion of priests are gay and have been open to the accusation that they are hostile to the ordination of women priests and antagonistic to idea of marriage among the clergy, not simply due to catholic doctrine.  It should come as no surprise that if the Catholic Church can be against child abuse while harbour child rapists within their ranks then they even more likely to countenance a “gay lobby” in their corridors of power while preaching anti-gay dogma.

The well recognized prominence of homosexuality in Church and politics could be seen as a major factor in abuse though not a reason for paedophilia and child molestation. Jason Berry, the Christian author of Lead us not into temptation found 40 to 50 per cent of Christian clergy to be overtly homosexual. (a further summary of homosexual priest statistics can be found at religious tolerance.org) Politically, paedophilia has been sort after for those to occupy key positions in government as a means for blackmail. In the Church the core infection of such a practice is a by-product of its hierarchical structure and secretive traditions. Predators go where they can best pursue their prey from the shadows of authority and since authority breeds the same predilection for abuse it veers toward a chicken-and-egg situation.

There is a distinction between actual paedophilia and pederasty which often gets confused. Relationships with teenagers (pederasty) according to one study formed over 81 per cent of discovered abuse. [12] With the new directives prohibiting gay men or “anyone who has been part of a gay subculture or had lived promiscuously as a heterosexual would be refused admittance into the Catholic priesthood” one can only wonder if this isn’t missing the point. [13] Preferences for male or female is not the issue. Rather, the issue of the Catholic Church itself that harbours such psychopathy and indeed may have found itself comprehensively ponerised by elements of the same.

In 2013, nothing has changed to allay fears of the Catholic faithful that abuse has stopped and that a gay lobby has been disbanded. In the UK, Cardinal Keith O’Brien resigned having been accused of “homosexual misconduct” whilst another priest in Scotland is suspended for daring to suggest that “homosexual priests intimidate others in the clergy.”  More importantly, back in New York’s Albany diocese was ordered by a Federal judge to turn over its clergy abuse files spanning 40 years. However, it seems this too favours the guilty. The request includes a sealing order which will keep the records from being made public. The request came from Albany diocese diocese and none other than  Gary J. Mercure who is “… an imprisoned Albany priest who is accused of systematically raping and abusing altar boys for years.”

It seems the Church and State never separated after all.

NBlHMRg


Notes

[1] Francis D. Murphy, Helen Buckley, and Larain Joyce, The Ferns Report, presented by the Ferns Inquiry to the Minister for Health and Children (Dublin: Government Publications, October 2005).
[2] ‘New abuse timebomb’by Brian MacDonald, Irish Independent, October 31, 2005.
[3] ‘Ireland shaken by sex abuse report’ By Brian Lavery, The New York Times, November 13, 2005.
[4] ‘Catholic bishops retain ‘zero tolerance’ policy’ – Will set aside $1m for sex abuse study By Michael Paulson, The Boston Globe, June 18, 2005.
[5] ‘Untouchable – Runaway Priests hiding in plain sight’, By Reese Dunklin. The Dallas Morning News June 20, 2004.
[6] ‘In Albany, sexual accusations raise a bishop’s high profile’ By Darryl McGrath, The Boston Globe, March 14, 2004.
[7] Capital News 9, Feb 8, 2004.
[8] ‘Priest’s mysterious death complicates’ Albany bishop’s quest to clear his name Michael S. Rose cruxnews.com., 27 February 2004.
[9] ‘Mystery Surrounds Death Of Priest’ By Paul Likoudis, The Wanderer Newspaper Online, wanderer.com. February 26, 2004.
[10] ‘Priest’s mysterious death complicates’ Albany bishop’s quest to clear his name Michael S. Rose cruxnews.com., 27 February 2004.
[11] Ibid.
[12] ‘Catholic bishops retain ‘zero tolerance’ policy Will set aside $1m for sex abuse study’ By Michael Paulson, The Boston Globe, June 18, 2005.
[13] Ibid.

The Politics of Entrapment V: Terror-Porn Fusion

“… rates of child sexual abuse have declined substantially since the mid-1990s, a time period that corresponds to the spread of CP online. . . . The fact that this trend is revealed in multiple sources tends to undermine arguments that it is because of reduced reporting or changes in investigatory or statistical procedures. . . . [T]o date, there has not been a spike in the rate of child sexual abuse that corresponds with the apparent expansion of online CP.”

Janis Wolak, David Finkelhor and Kimberly Mitchell (2011). “Child Pornography Possessors: Trends in Offender and Case Characteristics”. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment 23 (22). doi:10.1177/1079063210372143.


In the UK, new rules exist that oblige doctors and social workers to give the police any information they have about teenagers’ sex lives. The London Child Protection Committee (LCPC) protocol allows child welfare staff an unjustifiable level of interference in the sex lives of teenagers, which could risk breaching the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and the right to privacy enshrined in article eight of the convention. Senior lawyer Stephen Groz commented on the new protocol believing that: “It is particularly hard to see what justification there can be for routine assessment – if that is what is intended – in the case of those in the 16-18 year age group, where the prevention of crime will normally afford no justification at all.” [1] Mandatory sentencing where no clear definition of the crime is known is already steaming ahead. According to one expert, 12 and 13 year-old defendants “are being convicted of relatively minor sexual indiscretions in the crown court, and, if the law operates as it is supposed to, being sentenced to custody when it should be a supervision order.” [2]

With over 2,225 child offenders serving life without parole (LWOP) sentences in U.S prisons for crimes committed before they were age 18, [3] it seems Europe is being set to emulate the this direction. It is no surprise that America’s emerging “soft” fascism cloaked under the pretence of liberty is being welcomed by some governments of Europe.

Labour MP David Blunkett (who resigned in 2006 after yet another financial scandal) would likely have called such concerns “airy-fairy” and those seeking a fair and just system as the “enemy.” Blunkett proceeded to remove the presumption of innocence from the Sexual Offences act of 2003, giving a clear and straight road for court cases to be prosecuted successfully without any evidence. This laid greater emphasis on the prosecution state where, as in the US, you are presumed guilty before being proven innocent. This US version of the law paved the way for their fabrications in Operation Ore where an allegation alone was all it took to convict. That is not to say that all of the reforms have been dangerous. On the contrary, many are to be welcomed, yet those that are suspect are so grave that they tend to create difficulties that eclipse glimmers of progress.

Another stalwart defender of Blair’s Britain was Charles Clarke MP the UK government’s Interior minister who was at pains to tell the European Union that in his view: “The judges both in my country and in the European Court need to understand that the people of Europe … will not for a long time accept that action cannot be taken against people who are offering a real threat to our way of life because of human rights considerations …” [4] This kind of paramoralism is reminiscent of the same use of the Neo-Con theme of “they hate us for our freedoms” so often repeated as a blanket rebuttal for genuine concerns for civil liberties. Nonetheless, the die was cast.

The National Criminal Intelligence Service said in its annual report in 2003 that “more than half of the child porn sites are hosted in the United States” and that “the number of sites coming from Russia has doubled in the past year.” Evangelistic crusades are being encouraged and often waged whipping up a great deal of emotion with little factual data. Child pornography figures in some quarters have been massively overblown or in some cases plucked out of thin air. According to reports from within the US last year a 300 percent rise in internet paedophilia may indicate both a new phenomenon whereby a new technology is utilised but which also reinforces the mythology and lies designed to keep such dynamics firmly in place. If a new crisis is needed then child porn can be used as a “double-bind.” As one journalist recently remarked: “What an irony if the only readily available child porn on the Internet is being maintained by the police and the self-appointed monitors!” [5]

On the evening of January 17 2005, the UK’s Sky News reported on the false evidence used by the UK police in Operation Ore and the overwhelming incidences of corruption.  It remains to be seen if any action will be taken against the police perceived as protector and confidante, is about as far away from reality as it is possible to be. Some men and women in law enforcement know this very well, yet few speak out.

It is likely that much of the child pornography within societies today are produced and distributed underground through an informal but loose-knit networks of paedophiles operating in most European countries with sporadic burgeoning of paedophilia rings arising out of, or adjacent to sexual abuse within neighbourhoods and families. However, with the rise in child trafficking and clear indications of institutionalised child rape networks, child pornography as a multi-billion dollar industry may be, purposely exaggerated. Yet, as a strand in the overall industry of exploitation where billions are indeed accrued, it remains a connected reality, the dividends logically set to increase.

Michael Heimbach, head of the FBI’s Crimes Against Children Unit believes sexual deviants: “… have a real innate need to communicate with others … and sharing experiences. It’s a psychological support base; it makes them say, ‘I’m not so weird’. There are a lot of other people out there that like the same thing I do’’” The current case Heimbach was describing involved “An underground ring of adults who created and trafficked in pornographic videos of naked children being beaten with paddles, hairbrushes and canes.” The “loose-knit” group called the “Spanking Club” were said to have brutally beaten children as young as 4 years old. The club was seen as being influenced and encouraged by the availability of porn and internet chat-rooms where an exchange of fantasies and photos took place.[6]

The more disturbing links to pornography, trafficking and child abuse lead to the front door of the Establishment and naturally remain secured with cast iron protection. We see the guilty and often the innocent placed in prison and taking their own lives while high level paedophiles and child rapists remain above the law. It is also likely that most of the hardcore child porn that does exist is so far underground that it is alongside the impassable domain of the snuff movie where information is almost impossible to come by. For example, the discovery of crimes that may have been continuing undetected for decades are now frequently being seen via the relative “safety” of a closed system known as Internet Relay Chat – IRC – which requires participants to log in using passwords. And many of the paedophiles in question are no amateurs. They can be extremely competent with encryption usage and various other technical ways to avoid entrapment.

The vast majority of stings are carried out by the enormous stores of innocent child nudity and “artistic” erotica that under the laws of the US and increasingly Europe are deemed obscene. As we have seen, this material may also serve as a means to entrap people for private extortion. And what of the recent ruling from the US that effectively all porn is child porn? [7]

We then have the the Child Protection and Obscenity Enforcement Act also known as “2257” which now requires adult porn or erotica companies to keep detailed records proving that all the models they use are over the age of 18. These records contain the real names of performers and their addresses which have to be published somewhere online. It does not take a huge leap of logic to realize that this could leave some persons – such as women operating webcam shows from their homes – open to stalking and harassment. Moreover, all sites coming under the new law are required to have their address clearly accessible to all in order to indicate their “place of business.”  To avoid fines and jail terms persons must keep “proper records” and under the new version of 2257, all files that contain every single pornographic or erotic image and film published, must be cross-indexed with age-verification papers for every single performer that features in the stills or movies. This is a huge undertaking meaning massive overhauls for businesses hard drives, the records of which must be kept for seven years. The porn business is up in arms over the law claiming that it curtails significant freedoms. As the same report states: “…they have vast numbers of addresses to punch into their super computer for listing undesirables…. the Patriot Act [8] was used to prosecute people for offences that were not terrorist offences shortly after it became law.” [9]

We can easily forget how insidious these new acts and waiting executive laws really are and how they primed and ready to dispense with all constitutional rights. Clamping down on the business of porn is a red herring. As former director of UK civil rights organization and now a much needed voice as Deputy Chair of the new Independent Police Complaints Commission, John Wadham mentioned recently: “I recall an occasion attempting to argue that even alleged sex offenders have human rights, when confronted by the devastated mother of a child murdered by a sex offender.” [10]  Not an easy prospect, which is why child porn and public pornography in general could be one of the many channels by which we might endure a gradual but comprehensive lock-down on internet freedoms.

The genuine Russian-led examples of burgeoning child trafficking networks are a reality, as are some of the isolated European instances of exploitation. Typical examples include the arrest of five suspects in the Spanish cities of Madrid, Murcia, Lerida and Valencia in 2005. One man was charged with abducting, raping and abusing babies as young as 11 months while the others were charged with filming and distributing images of the abuse on the Internet.[11] Or the British man and father jailed for raping a baby with a sentence that was ridiculously lenient. [12] Both cases were proven instances that child molestation is a growing reality in our societies. This is the nature of the perfect double bind. There are further “politically correct” rulings that funnel more chaos into an already charged domain.

Take the 2004 ruling in the Italian high court that paedophiles can take pornographic photos of children as long as they are not sold for profit. Which means one can share and perpetrate acts of child porn as long as you do not charge for viewing the material, otherwise, it is legal. The report continues: “…that the Court of Cassation in Rome upheld the acquittal by a court in Turin of Antonio B., 45, over photographs that he took when he forced a youth of 13 to carry out sexual acts.”[13]

There are small clues in the above that included “forced” “sexual acts” and “profit.” One wonders what thoughts processes are running through those whose directives one would hope, are first and foremost to protect the interests of children. Similarly, Canada’s BC provincial court also came to the conclusion that possession of child porn represented a clear self-imposed boundary that would not be transgressed by those who chose to view such pornography. A court in Oregon believed a law that prohibited adults from giving minors sexually explicit materials violated the Oregon Constitution’s free speech protections.

There is, as we shall see, a huge difference between an individual who has exploited and even murdered a child for his own gratification and an individual who has been surfing for adult porn. This is the background to much of the prosecutions focused around child pornography. In such an emotive arena all manner of forces are vying for control and have little to do with liberty, least of all for the rights of the child. In effect, child pornography – while certainly encompassing very real predatory beings intent on using the internet to search for prey – is now a term that is used by law enforcement agencies to cover a multitude of sins extending to arts and basic pornography – regardless of its morality.

Let us keep in mind that in 2004 and 2005, three young children were killed by sex offenders. Congress immediately reacted and passed the most unconstitutional child abuse laws in the history of the USA. Yet, while the figures for the prevalence of sexual abuse remains contentious and unresolved, you can bet that the horrendous figures for physical abuse, drug abuse, gang related crime and drunk-driving deaths of children on the roads barely gets a mention. This is not sensational enough; this doesn’t get the voyeuristic and self-righteous juices flowing. Meanwhile, the financial, business and political “Elite” can play the “knight in shining armour” while indulging in the very practices they apparently eschew.

Inflating or even taking advantage of a rise in child pornography online could lead to a comprehensive ban on extreme examples of porn and finally pornography itself. For the masses that is. The tool of child porn will serve as a prelude to more extreme forms of “crimes against the state.” We may look for a gradual fusion between dissidents, Al-Qaeda and the “War on Terror” so that internet surveillance can be comprehensively tightened. The dawn raids of Landslide/Ore and other trawling and entrapment operations that ruined so many lives may well be the first stage in quelling any kind of dissidence of the near future. Criticism of the US government and Homeland Security is perceived as Bush’s line: “if you’re not with us you’re with the terrorists.”  In many American minds the sex offender and terrorist is more or less one and the same as in this Georgian State legislator’s opinion: “Sex offenders are the most reviled people in society… They’re one step above terrorists; there’s no political downside to cracking down on these folks.” It is then that we realise the true extent of ponerisation that is now occurring.

In Britain, the “surveillance society” is well and truly here. One of the ideas floated by the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre with children bombarded by images and info-tainment, was to turn them into “spy kids” for the Establishment in Europe and the US. This is the crux of the matter: to make people so dependent and reliant on the State from largely phantom fears that children especially feel compelled to turn their own parent’s in. “There are 9.5 million school-kids in the UK. Imagine if we could get them all to save the CEOP’s website to their favourites box so that whenever they are online they can fill in a form telling us who they are talking to, what (those people) are saying and why they think it is a threat.” [14]

The UK is the most spied-on country in the world according to a recent official report. We are being scrutinized, logged and photographed as never before with a typical Briton caught on camera over 300 times a day. The report highlighted concern over records kept of every internet site we visit and the long-term retention of logs detailing those visits to the growing use of automatic number plate recognition to track people’s journeys.  Integrate this with child porn and paedophile concerns – it’s a pretext for Orwellian controls ready and waiting for the State. But hyping the fear is essential. For instance, one study showed how easily the climate of paedophilia panic was eroding normal life. A schoolgirl’s playground banter: “… resulted in her father being refused work because he had been classed as a suspected paedophile. ‘The little girl was overheard saying, ‘My dad bonked me last night’. A dinner lady heard this and reported it to the school authorities,’… Social services discovered that the girl was referring to her father tapping her playfully on the head with an inflatable hammer. The file was closed, but five years later the father discovered he was still a suspected sex offender.” [15]

We are now faced with the possibility that factions within the US government itself, after seeking to stem a largely imaginary tsunami of child porn became its greatest purveyors and sellers. This was  due to factional objectives, the most important perhaps being the protection of an Elite who do indeed prey on children and young adults as a way of life, systemised and institutionalised by political expediency and blackmail.

Shout loud enough and hard enough with inflated figures and dubious data and the core subject matter, where it counts, becomes discredited.

As we can see from other prominent factors such as the War on Terror, the purpose may be to contribute to the initiation of draconian controls where misguided moralism lumps art into child pornography and along with child rape just as dissidents are cast under the same shadow of the terrorist. It is the ultimate justification for the death of internet free speech. The threat of child pornography and those affiliated with “terrorist groups” become the package by which internet freedom is lost for the “greater good.”

Taking this hypothesis further, we might conjecture that if that factions within governments are in control not only of narcotics, arms, human trafficking, but also the pornography industry we can see blackmail would play an increasingly decisive role in forcing certain people into taking top positions in NBC, NASA, Harvard, the military, the FBI, and FEMA. Perhaps there are many such virtual, commercial porn sites directly serving this purpose as recruiters for a new generation of politically compromised men. The Pathocracy needs key positions to be filled to facilitate a greater ease of psychologically compromised individuals whose influence is spread into the everyday lives of the populace enhancing their suggestibility towards specific pre-designed objectives. Those that “fit” in the core network of psychopathic groupings can then be relied upon to carry out their naturally allotted tasks. Disinformation artists in radio, television and the internet may have been given immunity from prosecution by federal authorities in return for defending the government.

Why not use the presence of child porn as the perfect pretext?

 


Notes
[1] Teen sex monitoring ‘may breach human rights’ David Batty, The Guardian, Wednesday December 14, 2005.
[2] Dr David Thomas Retired Cambridge University don, sentencing expert and author of leading textbook on sentencing. Quoted in ‘Judges speak out against erosion of independence by government’ The Guardian, Tuesday April 26, 2005.
[3] ‘United States: Thousands of Children Sentenced to Life without Parole’ National Study by Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch Finds Majority Face Life for First Offense, New York, October 12, 2005 Human Rights Watch, hrw.org/
[4] ‘EU must accept some erosion of civil rights-Britain,’ By Aine Gallagher, Reuters, September 7, 2005.
[5] Ibid.
[6] ‘Child Pornography Case Highlights Use of Internet in Crime’ By Michelle Mittelstadt, The Dallas Morning News, March 11, 2002.
[7] ‘On File’ By Annalee Newitz, AlterNet, http://www.alternet.org, June 22, 2005.
[8] The Patriot Act: HR 3162 RDS 107th Congress, 1st Session H. R. 3162 October 24, 2001, revised and updated to PATRIOT Act II in 2003. “Diminishes personal privacy by removing checks on government power, diminishes public accountability by increasing government secrecy; diminishes corporate accountability under the pretext of fighting terrorism; Undermines fundamental constitutional rights of Americans under overbroad definitions of ‘terrorism’ and ‘terrorist organization’ or under a terrorism pretext; Unfairly targets immigrants under the pretext of fighting terrorism. – b y Timothy H. Edgar, Legislative Counsel February 14, 2003 Section-by-Section Analysis of Justice Department draft ‘Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003,’ also known as “Patriot Act II” American Civil Liberties Union.
[9] Ibid.
[10] ‘I am ashamed to be leaving Liberty whilst people are interned without trial’ John Wadham LIBERTY editorial 2005 liberty.com.
[11] ‘Spanish police break up pedophile ring suspected of abusing babies’ Reuters, May 26 2005
[12] Baby rape sentence ‘unduly lenient’ BBC News, Wednesday, 3 September, 2003.
[13] ‘Italy and Oregon Courts Rule for Paedophilia’ June 2 2004 lifesite.net
[14] The Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre, July 25 Press Release, http://www.ceop.gov.uk/
[15] ‘Britain the most spied on People in the Western World’ The Sunday Times, October 29, 2006.

The Politics of Entrapment III: Inquisition or Protection?

“Sex. In America an obsession. In other parts of the world a fact.”

– Marlene Dietrich


We looked at the Landslide case and Operation Ore in the last post both of which are classic examples of police entrapment in the UK and the US. The defining attributes of entrapment related to child porn hasn’t changed much as we continue through to 2015.  What has become apparent when one reviews hundreds of entrapment cases related to internet paedophilia and child rape networks is the inherent mismanagement and corruption which seems to go with it. The incompetence is often so bad, that the only conclusion is that terror acts and sexual abuse is both prevented, permitted and created as a triangle of industry.

We may be willing to assign the possibility that much of the child porn that is present on the net is controlled by the police and intelligence agency departments in order to act as entrapment operations. So, if you are one of those inclined to view pornography – whatever the moral arguments – and find yourself face to face with an advertisement which appears mysterious or ambiguous, or even explicitly details child porn (including the private peer to peer confines of the so-called “Dark Net”) then the odds are higher that it will be a police entrapment set up.

The labelling of child porn and the moral panic surrounding it, will serve as one of many templates to Machiavellian deception that is so common amongst those who appear to be “protecting” us. The definitions of child pornography set down by America are so broad and vague that it has caused enormous confusion as to what exactly constitutes an obscene image. It is true to say now that the fear and paranoia induced has reached such proportions that mothers and fathers are fearful of taking photos of their naked child or exhibiting nude images where art is the primary driver.

Art, like innocence, has been debased by those who claim to champion its protection. By lumping sexual abuse and child porn into a category that includes artistic renditions of, for example, naked children through photography, is to demean the very nature and appreciation of beauty and the celebration of what it means to live in a free society as oppose to an absolutist one.  As one writer on this subject mentioned: “If images of beautiful nude children are as much pornographic as those of children being raped, then while the beautiful are criminalized the pornographic are made less criminal.” [1]
And then on the other side of the coin, we have the sexualisation of children and young adults occurring in the music, fashion and obviously the accessbility of entrepreneurial amateur porn. These create conflicting messages indeed for everyone, let alone children.

 Irish author and journalist Brian Rothery casts further doubt on the figures bandied about by some police and child abuse advocates. A graph was created from a range of internet research sources which were then used to display the relationships between sites known to contain child porn and all sites on the Internet. Figures revealed make interesting reading:

“… 5 million total sites, 3.5 million public sites and 8,700 CP sites. The 1.5 million difference between public and total is made up of private sites, mainly corporate where one requires a password (not CP sites requiring passwords). The difference in number between the CP and other sites is so great that on a normal graph page, the CP does not register. It is one fifth of one percent – 0.02 percent.

But now let us examine that figure more closely. First the 8,700 contains many duplications, as images are copied. Let us assume that 20 percent of them share images in differing mixes. This reduces the number of CP sites to 7,000. Many of the CP sites move. xyz.com hosted in Brazil one day can appear as abc.kg hosted in, say, Russia the next, and be counted as two within the analysis period. Say 10percent move, reducing the number to 6,300.

There are more sites with child nudity and child erotica, which may be judged by the analysts as CP, than there are real CP sites. A good guess would be most of them. Let’s say 4,000, leaving 2,300. Now for simulated and artificially created images, such as Japanese Hentai, where no real children are photographed, and which many defenders of free expression say should not be criminalized, but, that argument aside, do not involve porn with real children. A conservative guess would be around 6,000, maybe more. This leaves between one or two and 300 CP sites. Let’s take the upper figure. We do not know what jurisdiction in the world would not arrest the hosters and makers of these 300 sites but what we do know is that some of our brave censors have worked hard to find the few that have existed. If there are 300, they make up 0.0007 percent of the total number of web sites on the Internet.[2] [Emphasis mine]

What could be the other motives for capitalising on the promotion of fake child porn websites?

Returning to the UK/US Landslide case under Operation Ore which spawned many other child pornography “crackdowns” the subscriber database and all of the other main Landslide FBI/prosecution files show an interesting precedent never revealed to the defence. Researchers at inquisition21.com have discovered that “… credit cards, however obtained, whether from attempts to access adult sites over Landslide, generated by a program or simply stolen, were ‘jumped’ to so-called ‘child porn’ sites.” The rogue webmasters in question “… used the transaction to charge (defraud) the owner and, because of the extreme names of the sites charged to, embarrass the owner into not complaining about the $30 or so robbed in each transaction.” They compromised the credit card owners by:“‘… incriminating their computers with illegal images. Whilst people believed they were signing up to legitimate adult sites, in reality they were signing up to illegal sites. Forensically, the user’s computer would appear totally incriminating – the signup and the images. This was almost a perfect crime, and this has happened in at least one high profile case.’ ” [3]

The inevitable conclusion is that the payment system was designed to automatically switch from adult to child pornography sites which meant that people were arrested for nothing more than their site names. The fact that the sites did not exist seemed immaterial. Inquisition 21 Group saw the programming codes on the rogue sites that allowed the victims to be jumped to illegal sites and were in doubt that both the UK and Irish police should have seen them.

There are many seeking an earnest appraisal of the subject of child porn just as they are with the roots causes of terrorism. However, both are areas suffering from information dominance and prone to co-option by Establishment agencies for their own purposes. This is due primarily to the high yields of emotional capital available. When there is a probability for collective reaction to a controversial subject then the opportunities are always there to engineer that reaction. High octane emotions and fear are easily channelled. That being the case, clearly distinguishing what constitutes a crime and what may be erotic exploration and innocent art is presently fraught with difficulty due to new legislation and the ubiquity of entrapment set ups.  When civil rights groups and law enforcement agencies become the sole mediators of what constitutes erotic art and child porn, it is a dark day indeed for freedom.

Most people know that there is a huge difference between child pornography that depicts the rape and abuse of a child or infant and the celebration of childhood which may or may not include children  … (gasp) without clothes. There will also always be those who position themselves in the grey area that encourages extreme laws such as pre-teen websites that are ostensibly a pictorial diary that neither include nudity or anything remotely close to porn.[4] However, it certainly could be said to be pandering to paedophiles and those with paedophilic tendencies. Yet, knowing that this is unsavoury, it is not illegal or criminal. In a world that is teetering on a soft form of totalitarianism in all domains, it is an important distinction. Labelling ordinary people “sex offenders” or “suspected terrorists” is becoming easier and easier for police and law-makers. As we shall see in later posts this may well be the overarching objective.

What we have now is yet another form of self-righteous, dogma against imagery that does not conform to evangelical principles. The criminalisation of artistic or dramatic representation; objective intellectual examination and speculation – even thoughts, if they are written down or recorded – are now seen as grounds for prosecution with the sex offender register beckoning.  Once again, that is not to say that child pornography may not be on the rise. This was true enough during the raids from the UK Operation Cathedral where torture and degradation was visited on many children and infants. But caution and the utmost scepticism must remain regarding the causes for such operations, based on the evidence so far. This is especially true if we are not see such operations being politicised so that they are used to imprison dissidents and those who threaten to expose the deep black nature of the political and intelligence apparatus.

sallymann

From the cover of Sally Mann’s: ‘Immediate Family’ which included nude photos of her children. It was lauded by critics as “beautiful” but condemned by the American religious right as pornography. http://sallymann.com/

At this stage it should be no surprise that in the Landslide case and others, the data base of credit card subscribers handed over to overseas police by US authorities, notably the FBI, were found to have had the names of prominent members of government and institutional officials removed, leaving only minor local level politicians, media and celebrity names. These were never raided in the US with authorities stating no evidence of fraud was found.

Could it be that factions within US law enforcement agencies are doing what they historically do best and creating crime for the purposes of blackmail and propaganda “success” stories in exactly the same way that police and British intelligence were doing under Thatcher’s government?  Are elements within police and judiciary, government and intelligence doing so in order to faciliate the creation of a new industry and convenient smokescreen to protect high level child abusers?

According to inquisition 21 researchers this is not in the realm of conspiracy, simply a case of historical fact. As they mention: “It should not be [a surprise] when we already know that virtually all of the child pornography on the Internet today is published by the US police for entrapment purposes.” [5]

Consider a Southern California Police seminar in 1990 where “… LAPD’s Toby Tyler proudly announced that law enforcement agencies were now the sole reproducers and distributors of child pornography.” Author James Kincaid confirm the statement from his own experiences in 2000:

“Several speakers at an L.A. police seminar I attended a few years back laughingly admitted that the largest collection of child porn in the country is in the hands of cops, who edit and publish it in sting operations. There is at most, they say, a small cottage industry among civilians in which pictures (most of them vintage) are traded.” And internet abuse expert John Carr:  “‘I have only seen child pornography twice in my life and then it was at conferences and I was shown it by the police.’” […] There may well be a consensus on the principle of child porn, but there is little consensus on what constitutes child porn.” [6]

The child exploitation industry has now fused with the police directed NGOs. On Monday 24 July 2006, the UK Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre, (CEOP) was launched. Director Jim Gamble believes the way forward is to create fake paedophile websites over which ‘undercover’ officers will pose as children on Internet chat rooms. This reflects more of the FBI’s already active in chat-room entrapment operations in both the Americas and Asia. Creating paedophiles where there are none is as effective as searching for and blackmailing those that are, especially when they reside in the lower rungs of the Establishment.

Is the US/UK Establishment creating a virtual CoIntelpro operation using the child exploitation industry as yet another tool for control while increasing a climate of paranoia and fear?

In March 2011, possibly the biggest online global paedophile ring was smashed by Euro-authorities after extensive operation to ensnare members within a global forum – boylover.net – who had up to 70,000 members. Some 670 suspects were identified worldwide, nearly 200 of whom have been arrested. It seems such operations will be continuing well into the future for a variety of complex reasons, where one would hope the protection of the child is the overriding priority.  [7]  “Child porn” may be another label for which the old boys’ network can justify more jobs while actually creating predators and encouraging them to commit certain crimes, thus serving to bury the real child pornography which does exist though possibly in fewer quantities than we were led to believe and hidden more deeply in the encrypted software “vaults” of high society.

America is leading the way in cases of child porn prosecution. The legitimacy of certain sting operations are certainly open to question but the key issue is the the use of entrapment and the rise of pre-crime.  Fused together this is another symptom of society under attack from psychopathological thinking which in turn it leading us down the road to Pathocracy.

inquisition“Inquisition” by Goya

That child pornography exists is beyond question. The extent to which it can be used as a tool for social control is less understood.

The notorious Attorney General Ed Meese back in the late 70s early 80s ironically, may have been the first to be given the mission to heighten the existence of child porn in society. One scenario for this was to create a climate of law breakers, to foster fear and retribution and to further lead America into a state of decline. Commensurate with Kinseyian and Freudian programming, this ensured that society became more decadent than it really was.

In effect, the US government itself may have become one of the mainstays of child pornography. In much the same way as narcotics and arms, it filled a role of both purveyor and habitual user which continues to this day.  Sting operations are initiated to turn around the possible fall in child pornography crime, where the would-be purchasers are actively solicited and eventually prosecuted under new laws.

Writer Jim Peron, a writer and bookseller based in Auckland, New Zealand states:

First, the age limit was raised from 16 to 18 placing the United States outside the Western mainstream. An entire class of publications, which previously had been legal, were now illegal. Publications which were purchased legally in the United States became illegal overnight without the bulk of owners being aware of the change.

Second, Congress dropped the requirement that something be “obscene” before being classified as child pornography. Now the law was so broadly written that family snapshots of a nude child playing in the bath, could be prosecuted—and were!

Third, it was no longer necessary to produce or distribute the newly banned material. Mere possession was now illegal. [8]

Peron goes on to describe how the government created dozens of phony companies and began soliciting people to purchase the material. Government agencies would send brochures under a fake company name to the individual they targeted and in most cases, proceed to relentlessly pester the individual until a sale was made. The police would place adverts in adult publications pretending, for example, to be a woman with a young daughter. This “woman” would then solicit correspondence from men until the men finally decided to buy the material. Prosecutions soared and the moral majority were exulted. However, the problem was, as Attorney Lawrence Stanley pointed out: “…the line between law enforcement and inducing law-breaking has become highly blurred, as undercover “friends” encourage the forbidden fantasies of their targets and sell or send them child pornography after a great deal of prodding. In some cases, the forbidden fantasies are those of the investigating agent.” [9]

Government sting operations included setting up shop as bonafide pornography outlets which were actively peddling child porn and other hardcore images sourced from the belief that the US was under attack from a veritable legion of pimps and paedophiles.  According to Peron, John O’Mally a customs agent created a company called “Produit Outaouais” which offered photos and videos: “The government officials would reproduce photos of young children and mail them to individuals they targeted. Newsweek reported: ‘Together with similar stings run by the US Postal Service over the past few years, federal agents have become major traffickers in kiddie porn.’ In this sting operation alone two individuals who were entrapped by O’Malley committed suicide; one a 25-year-old student and the other an attorney.” [10]

We have seen the harassment of artists, parents and ordinary family members taking nude pictures of their children under entirely natural and loving circumstances. This was turned into something sordid and degrading in the minds of the prosecutors resulting in untold trauma for all those targeted. Under the guise of “protection” these laws are further eroding civil liberties both in the United States and the UK. In spite of this, the same Lawrence Stanley was arrested for paedophilia, whilst Jim Peron was also caught out in March 2005 when The Society For the Promotion of Community Standards Inc. triumphantly outed Peron’s agenda in publishing the article. According to the society which upholds censorship issues, Peron, sold a journal called Unbound (Vol. 1 No. 4) at his Free Forum Books in San Francisco in 1985. The Society, seeking a classification, further stated that the journal was: “readily available to the public in Mr Peron’s bookshop along with the ‘pro-paedophile journal’ NAMBLA (North American Man Boy Love Association).” [11]

The previous owner of the bookshop, Eric Garris, apparently confronted Peron about his “pro-paedophilia” material recounting that “Mr Peron confirmed that Free Forum Books published it.” Detailed within the journal were the objections against a police raid subsequently carried out on Peron’s bookshop where copies of Unbound and other pro-paedophilia publications were seized “in the course of an on-going investigation into David Simons (a part-time employee of Mr Peron’s, who was later arrested, convicted and jailed for 16 years for committing sex-offences against children).” [12]

Peron rather unconvincingly denies anything untoward though admitted he wrote an article “Abused: One Boy’s Story” which he said was used without his permission, defending his piece in lieu of the fact that there was no explicit sexual content while denying that he was referring to paedophiles when using the term “boy lover”. He also further denied involvement with the journal claiming that: “Unbound was published by another person who rented a back office from his former bookstore.” [13]  In the Society’s view and many others, Peron was in fact the editor-in-Chief of Unbound and was trying to wriggle out of the spotlight.

It becomes a little more disturbing when we know that Peron’s source was the aforementioned attorney Lawrence Stanley, who specialised in defending those accused of child pornography and who was arrested in Brazil, charged with child exploitation. Infiltrating the law was not his only speciality. Stanley had “built an international business photographing Brazilian girls and selling their photos through the Internet.” One of these sites: “…featured photos of girls ages 8 to 14 in what police Officer Rui Gomes described to the Associated Press as ‘sensual poses.’ Police said Stanley paid the girls $20 to $40 for each photo session. An official of the Brazilian Embassy in Washington did not respond to a request for information on Stanley’s case.” [14]

Though typical of the smoke and mirror operations perpetrated against the public, it is the greatest irony to allow those questioning tactics and statistics regarding child porn to be those that benefit from a greater relaxation of the laws. It amounts to the same ruse when white supremacists cry foul against the discrepancies of Zionist deceptions thereby cancelling out any veracity of the original authorship and research. In other words, these become straw man arguments designed to deflect heat away from the subjects in question.

Once again, the public is none the wiser and the abuse continues.

 


Notes

[1] ‘The Crimen Exceptum of our era….’ Stop the insanity | http://www.rogerisright.blogspot.co.uk
[2] Inquistion 21st Century – ‘Child Pornography’ | www. inquisition.com/
[3] ‘New evidence will also undermine Operation Amethyst’ http://www.inquisition21.com.
[4] ‘Legal child porn’ under fire MSNBC By Mike Brunker March 28 2002 — “The photos of 12-year-old “Amber” cavorting in a swimsuit and various skimpy outfits wouldn’t have raised so much as an eyebrow if they had been posted on a family home page. But on lilamber.com — one of a growing number of “preteen model” sites operating in the legal gray area between innocent imagery and child pornography — they have drawn the attention of the Justice Department and prompted a congressman to declare war on the “reckless endangerment” of such kids by their parents and Web site operators.”
[5] ‘The crime exceptum’ inquisition21.com.
[6] Ibid.
[7] ‘Global paedophile ring smashed, say police’ Euro News, http://www.euronews.com March 16, 2011.
[8] “The Claptrap Over Child Porn” by Jim Peron, The Laissez Faire Electronic Times: Part 2: The US Government Enters the Child Porn Business’,vol. 2, no. 19, May 12, 1987/2003.
[9]   Ibid.
[10] Ibid.
[11] Classify “Pro-Paedophilia Journal” Unbound Thursday, 31 March 2005, Press Release: Society For Promotion Of Community Standards Inc. New Zealand.
[12] Ibid.
[13] Ibid.
[14] ‘Lawyer arrested in Brazil charged with child exploitation’ By Robert Stacy McCain The Washington Times, July 24, 2002.

Crowd Control I

By M.K. Styllinski

“It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a  profoundly sick society.”

– Krishnamurti



In this post I want to offer some further examples on just how complex and confused our ideas of sexuality, sexual offences and the law has come to be, primarily due to our lack of awareness of ponerology and the development of our Official Culture.

A recent Telegraph report has highlighted the kind of ridiculous mindset so prevalent in US lawmakers. Some of these wise men and women in the State of Virginia:  “… want to make oral sex illegal for teens aged 15-17, although it’s still legal for two teens aged between 15-17 to have vaginal sex with each other.”

I kid you not.

As journalist Rebecca Holman rightly points out: “If you ban oral sex, what else will these teenagers do with their time? Set fire to bins? Do poppers? Shoot things with air rifles? HAVE ‘ACTUAL’ SEX? All of the above?”

There continues to be considerable controversy in the West as to what denotes a balanced and natural sexual expression for children. With our culture becoming increasingly sexualised on the one hand (Kinseyian programming) and made to feel dirty and deviant on the other (fundamentalist religious conservatism) it is little wonder that children and young adults are becoming confused and disoriented.  In any given case, there are complex interplay of forces which define the descent into abuse.  Translating new insights from psychology and social science and transforming them into practical tools for educational and treatment practices are proving challenging to implement. The battle between those who advocate what amounts to a form of anti-sexuality clashes with the those who posit a pervasive sexualisation of women AND men. This is producing an almost irreversible tension in the minds of children. The issues they raise are valid in each camp but they are politicised, thus producing more noise rather than true solutions.

Those that advocate the extreme curtailment of sexual freedom are offering children repression, conformity and far too strict a definition of what is sexually “appropriate.” This fear-based and reflexive wish to white-wash the child into a perfect angelic purity serves to warp the natural growth of the child’s sensual curiosity and inquisitiveness. Over in the United States, the city of San Diego is a case in point. Though instances of abuse clearly exist, it seems the cases where the authorities got it hopelessly wrong are also common:

In 1992, a major grand jury investigation found the county’s child welfare agencies and juvenile courts to be ‘a system out of control,’ so keen on protecting children from predation that it took hundreds of them away from their parents on what turned out to be false charges. The report called for ‘profound change’ throughout the system. […] Teachers and social workers, undereducated in psychology and overtrained (often by law enforcers) in sexual abuse, tend to see sexual pathology and criminal exploitation in any situation that looks even remotely sexual. [1]

And this is a form of ponerisation in itself where paranoia sits next to very real abuse and a product of the exact same degeneration. For example, there is still resistance to the fact that as psychopathy rises to positions of power, and as society begins to exhibit symptoms of psychopathological inculcation it may follow that more sociopaths, narcissists and psychopaths will emerge in society as a whole.  The type of intervention that blends the law courts, mental health and psychological evaluations are too close to the needs of lawyers tuning in to the lucrative climate of sex-predator-paranoia. In many cases, the law is actually causing great harm to children for no other reasons of greed and material gain.

c-g05-eng

www.statcan.gc.ca/

c-g06-eng

The above statistics offered by the Canadian government in 2012 show that the highest police reported sexual offences per 100,000 and by age ranges from 13-15 years old with the highest age of victims of sexual offences at 14-15 years old. What is extraordinary in Canada at least, is the high rate of offences from females far outstripping males which may reflect the commensurate rise in narcissistic behaviour in young women and girls.

Over in the state of Texas, USA it is a similar story. While juvenile crime has gone down overall sexual assault has continue to rise according to statistics from 2007 – 2011. Yet how much of this is drawn from genuine pathology and / or the result of draconian laws and the blurred definitions as to what is a “sexual offence”?

628x471

Sex crimes by juvenile offenders are on the rise in Harris County,”by Cindy Horswell, Houston Chronicle, April 21, 2012.

While offering some welcome amendments, the UK’s Sexual Offences Act 2003 nevertheless incorporates new and draconian provisions on child pornography and prostitution. [3] Anyone asking a person under 18 to provide a “sexual service” for “payment” commits a crime and the child (those under 18) is classed as a “prostitute.” However, if an individual asks a person under 18 for a nude-photograph this will automatically be considered a criminal offence or “inciting child pornography”. This means that anyone under 18 and engaged in a relationship is legal, but when expressed physically with the use of a web-cam, they become criminals. All those under 18 of course, are deemed “children” which, when applied to the law, is unfair and dangerous to civil rights. The law is therefore, high on rhetoric but low on the practical realities of such a law.

Compare this UK jailing of a man along with his female accomplice, who raped a 12 week old baby. [4] The subsequent sentence reflected a clear deficit in the justice of the law where “life” meant that the perpetrator was eligible for parole in only six to eight years. We have to wonder why it is that the justice system seems to either favour the predator or to accuse and scapegoat the innocent, rarely finding the median between those two poles. Should genuine sexual predators find themselves with a silver spoon in their mouths then the likelihood that they will face prosecution and punishment becomes even less probable.

Protection is always afforded to the aristocracy and the upper classes of the British Establishment with favouritism filtering down to the outer rings. In one instance a judge give undue leniency to the Queen’s former choirmaster for a series of child sex attacks in the 1970s and 80s. He received five years meaning he would be out on good behaviour in a very short space of time, which indeed he is. [5] While this occurs in the UK, such disparities are far more extreme in the US.

Being caught urinating behind a tree, mooning, skinny dipping, masturbating, and passionate lovemaking and many other non-violent, victimless offences can make individuals sex criminalss and placed on the sex offenders register. A “doctor and nurse” game could now criminalise both US and UK children.  However, those that voice such concerns are either labelled paedophile apologists and tainted with an undue liberal reflex or are quite literally paedophile advocates! When criminalisation has broad generalisations and poorly defined legislation contained within it and where essential definitions are needed for each sexual crime, the inevitable result is that all sexual activity is seen as criminal. When we understand, in the real world, that much sexual activity involving children under the age of consent is consensual and experimental, the involvement of the law should not be necessary.

What the law does is to effectively criminalise young people under 16 who engage in sexual experimentation. Coercion is so often assumed in many cases. If a fifteen year old girl “forces” a 16 year old boy into having sexual relations, what then? What if they are genuinely “in love?” Is the boy to be prosecuted and placed on the sex offenders register?  Apparently so.

One example from an American mother who wrote an open letter to former President George W. Bush, on an internet blog illustrated the crassness of current legislation which has yet to improve:

Dear George:

I am a mother of a sex offender, at least that is what they are calling it. My son did not rape, abuse, or force anyone. He had sex with a minor, who also wanted sex with him. I am not an educated female, but I do know the difference between forcing someone and consenting.

I do not Condone what my son did, it was wrong and he should be punished. My problem is this: he was sentenced to 30 yrs. to a violent prison. On his court papers it says it was a non-violent crime. So why is he in a violent prison? No one will give me the time of day. Also he has to register as a SO. [sex offender] […]

I would like to be alive when my son gets out.[6]

One of the most recent examples of this dangerously simplistic view of prosecution concerns 17 year old Genarlow Wilson who was convicted of Aggravated Child Molestation for a voluntary act of oral sex with another teenager at a New Year’s Eve party.  He was 17 and she was 15.  Genarlow,  a good student, athlete and with no criminal record not only received a sentence of eleven years but the disastrous label of “child molester” requiring him to be placed on the sex offender register for life. He was also black.

“ ‘Wilson maintained his innocence. ‘I know that it was consensual,’ he told ‘Primetime.’ ‘I wouldn’t went on with the acts if it wasn’t consensual. I’m not that kind of person. No means no.’”

“ ‘Five of the boys accepted plea deals, but Wilson — the only one without a police record — held out. ‘I knew Genarlow’s state of mind,’ said his attorney, Michael Mann. ‘He wasn’t going to prison willingly. He wasn’t going to plea to something in his mind he didn’t do.’” [7]

Such is the law in the State of Georgia where two teens can have intercourse which is counted as a misdemeanour but where oral sex is a felony carrying a minimum of 10 years in prison. If two teens are engaged in heavy petting, this could be felony of child molestation. Until 1998, oral sex between husband and wife was illegal, punishable by up to 20 years in prison. For Wilson, whether the fifteen year old was willing or not, and the fact that he was only two years her senior, the law on child molestation had the last word. Was Wilson’s case yet another miscarriage of justice based on outdated laws favouring a religious puritanism?  A public outcry concerning the Wilson case was thought to have secured his release after serving four years. His sentence was deemed “dispropotionate” but the original conviction was unaltered. As a result of this case however, Georgia law is being reconsidered, though at the time of writing any formal legislation has yet to materialise.

It has not helped a 26-year-old college student on federal disability, who has been on the sex offender’s registry for a decade after a being charged over 10th grade fellatio. Despite the fact that it is no longer a crime in Georgia she and her husband have had to be moved on by Harlem police under sex offences law that prohibits “offenders from living within 1,000 feet of a school, playground or other place where children congregate.”

Careless and ill-considered, perhaps, but criminal? This woman was ordered to leave her legally bought home or face arrest:

Before she and her husband of six years bought the house, she says, they made sure the property was far enough away from a public park down the street. What the Whitakers didn’t realize was that a nearby church was operating a small day-care center. As a result, they’ve had to move into a trailer park across the county line. They’re sharing a two-bedroom single-wide with Whitaker’s brother-in-law and his teenage daughter.‘We’re paying a mortgage for my cat to live here,’ she says of the house she and her husband have had to leave behind. When she stops by to check on the property or do laundry, she says, her neighbors routinely call the cops, who drop by to make sure she isn’t trying to move back in.

Now, Georgia’s strict new sex-offender law — signed by Gov. Sonny Perdue in April but delayed in federal court before it could take effect July 1 — could force Whitaker out of the trailer park as well, leaving her with few options for living anywhere in the state. Under a nebulous loitering provision in the new law, she might not even be allowed to go to church. [8]

Judgments concerning adult sex offenders which are then applied to children and often careless adults alike can represent a dangerous misunderstanding of the nature of sexuality. For children, while the mimicking and simulation of T.V. and magazine images and messages may be an indication of a premature sexual induction that may lead to so called unwarranted behaviour towards other children, it should not immediately be confused with pathology or abuse. Yet this is exactly what is happening in many instances. This is more likely an indication of an adult prurience projected onto the child who may actually ensure that such explorations do become neurotic, obsessive or worse.

At the same time, psychopathic children could be a reality where no amount of rehabilitation is ever going to work. The very real indications that conviction rates of child molesters in the UK for example, are frighteningly low, the extreme difficulties in detecting the abuse of under-fives and the general underreporting of incidences, all suggest that we are still operating between two extremes.

What is appears to be true is a steady rise in sexual offences in the United States, Canada and certain European countries. The true statistics may be extremely difficult to ascertain since we have draconian, repressive laws operating alongside psycho-social and technology influences further mixed with the social engineering of oversexualisation and the anti-sexuality reflex of moral panic. What is certain is that children are as increasingly confused and lost as adults when it comes to healthy sexual identity.panic_button_1600_clrMoral Panics and Neural Circuits

The question of “moral panic” was first coined by British sociologist Stanley Cohen from his study of UK mods and rockers during the 1970s. He used this term to define the role of media and deviant behaviour which fed on peoples’ already sensitive fears of the unknown, still raw from economic hardship. The threat from this perceived deviancy was thereby exaggerated, fuelling unrest. Cohen defined this collective behaviour as:

“A condition, episode, person or group emerges to become defined as a threat to societal values and interests; its nature is presented in a stylized and stereotypical fashion by the mass media; the moral barricades are manned by editors, bishops, politicians and other right thinking people; socially accredited experts pronounce their diagnosis and solutions; ways of coping are evolved or (more often) resorted to; the condition then disappears, submerges or deteriorates and becomes visible.”  [9]

A recent UK Home office report found that “a lack of intimacy and high levels of loneliness” were common factors in the profiles of the vast majority of sex offenders, similar to the high level of neglected children in the UK and abroad. [10] Far from dealing with the dark and hidden aspects of our collective shadows we have found new ways to limit reality and thus our own understanding by creating new demons, whether they are paedophiles or terrorists.

Both exist, but not in the ways that governments and their agencies would like us to think. Just as anti-sexuality and puritanical beliefs clash with overt sexualisation, so too the divisions between those who promote moral panic as opposed to finding out the root sources of abuse and sexual crime.

Sarah Payne’s law in the UK and Megan’s law in the US both seek to alert the public about the whereabouts of the sex offender in your town or village under the guise of freedom and protection. [11] Though it seems logical that we should all be alerted to the presence of paedophiles and child killers in our neighbourhoods evidence suggests that further isolating and excluding the offender, – child molester or not – and reinforcing this identity through stigmatisation, naturally drives such people underground, continuing the likelihood of long-term child abuse or other related crimes.

The question of such moral panics disappearing is dependent on how useful their presence may be. Self-appointed vanguards of this moral imperative would love to believe they are upholding the sanctity of society as they perceive it. It is more likely that they are merely cogs in the wheel of a purposely initiated “panic” that is tailored towards a pre-designed conclusion. The witch hunts of 17th Europe; the trials of the Spanish Inquisition; the Nazi programs of genocide are testament to the ease by which ponerisation of an idea then “injected” into the populace can be initiated.

The primary mode of panic thus adopted appears to have been the “Elite-engineered” model, [12] with other secondary models under its influence. We can include the Grass Roots model of a dissatisfied society achieving catharsis through retribution and the Interest Group model made up of advocates, activists, interests groups and think-tanks seeking to bring awareness to the “moral evils” in society. These latter forces work in tandem with each other come up against the infinitely more knowledgeable core of Elite control, the top tiers of which have had the populace under a microscope for a considerable length of time. These “positive” forces for change can thus be easily manipulated despite an increasing awareness.

When the action of negative feedback is excluded from contemporary discourse concerning abuse and the nature of the child molester, the obvious outcome is a headlong rush to reaction without any understanding of the consequences. Judgments about whether one is a child molester, a terrorist, mentally ill, or a dissident, it is becoming the province of authorities which are tied to regressive world-views and corrupt political interests. Moral panics lead to various individuals and groups becoming scapegoats for a host of inner demons the history of which is long and rich, whether they are the “white trash” of nomadic America or the Irish gypsies on the outskirts of London. When crude moral indignation surfaces with clamours for “justice,” scapegoating always emerges from its artificial womb.

KF987881_942long

Quite apart from religious absolutism, moral panics were often whipped up by the authorities for political or monetary gain. Women were the primary targets. | Photo credit: Witch Hunt Exhibition, Vestry House Museum March 2012

The more horrific and depraved the crime, the easier it can be to direct the fear and revulsion towards a group or individual and the solution provided by the Establishment to enact laws or justify social engineering. The reaction of populations against the real or imagined threat of sexual predators creates the vortex to which all “deviance” or resistance is drawn. Behind this chaos lie select members in power for whom such confusion is ripe for manipulation. The reaction seems to follow a pattern whereby those least able to defend themselves are targeted such as ethnic, religious and sexual minorities. Sexual offenders in the US, under the present laws, many of whom have placed on the register as dangerous sex offenders, may have only committed relatively minor offences. This serves to bypass the real culprits who were responsible for the crimes.

Medical and health authorities are becoming the next stage in the law and justice treadmill, where dissent and deviancy are judged to be “abnormal” or threatening, the hatred of the paedophile becomes a microcosm of bigotry and intolerance then applied to many other “deviant” groupings. There is a medicalization of social control where mental illness, ethics and political bias merge. That is not to say that we must embrace deviancy that is clearly harmful to the child as outlined in the previous chapter. There must be the clearest definitions possible so as to maintain the purest objectivity in a world of full of murky disinformation.

While the “moral panic” meme does have validity it also acts to mask deeper social problems that lie festering at the roots. Social constructivist solutions are focused on how and why these issues become defined at particular historical junctures but they neglect the overall synthesis of why these social problems appear in the first place and are singled out for public exposure. Ponerisation operates on precisely these gaps in awareness, where sophisticated “twists” on truth discombobulate individuals and groupings perceived as threatening to the status quo. The tide of emotional rage becomes paramount and reasoning leaves by the back door, held open by the authorities. For instance, the multiple strands of warring interests groups exclude the possibility that in some cases there is unwarranted panic about Satanism and ritual abuse whilst in other instances it has been proven exist. Centralisation and bureaucracy tends to quash lateral thinking and multi-disciplinary approaches.

The technique of scapegoating comprehensively pervades the media, the judiciary and law enforcement. Though there are numerous cases of justified sentencing of child molesters and rapists, there is also a tragic quota of those wrongfully accused. If the individual is guilty, a remorseless witch hunt results in a regression towards vigilantism and the herd mentality, often destroying all that goes before it. The net result, (so beneficial to the Establishment), leaves civil society with a situation far worse than the one that preceded it. Miscarriages of justice are intermingled with genuine abuse all of which produces an exponential footprint of trauma that engulfs communities and feeds media sensationalism.

Examples of high profile ritual or familial abuse claims came pouring in from around the world during the late nineties and early 2000’s including the Orkney Islands, the Pitcairn Islands, the Isle of Lewis, Rochdale and Cleveland cases of sexual abuse in the UK and the Christchurch Crèche case in New Zealand; the separate cases of Saskatoon, Saskatchewan and Martensville ritual abuse, the Shieldfield child abuse scandal in the US and several others. It is precisely because the abuse was present that the methods used by police and the judiciary ensured that innocent men and women took the fall for predators ensconced in the community and with links to those in wider positions of power.

 


*  For an instructive look at the reality of child psychopaths and the havoc they can cause have a look at the film Joshua (2007) and We need to talk about Kevin (2011). These are extreme cases admittedly, but the core disturbances they cause are very real.

Notes

[1] p.34; Levine, Judith; Harmful to Minors: The Perils of Protecting Children from Sex, University of Minnesota Press (2002).
[2] Severe Attachment Disorder in Childhood – A Guide to Practical Therapy by Dr. Niels Peter Rygaard authorized by D.P.A., Aarhus C, Denmark Translated from N. P. Rygaard, L’enfant abandonn6. Guide de traitement des troubles de I’attachement. 2005; Printed in Austria by SpringerWien New York. | ISBN-10 3-211-29705-7.
[3] Sexual Offences Act 2003 Elizabeth II. Chapter 42, Great Britain – “An Act to make new provision about sexual offences, their prevention and the protection of children from harm from other sexual acts Royal assent, 20th November 2003. Explanatory notes have been produced to assist in the understanding of this Act and are available separately (ISBN 0105642037) Reprinted incorporating corrections, January 2004; reprinted May 2004.” TSO The Stationary Office: http://www.tso.co.uk/
[4] “Babysitter raped 12-week-old as girlfriend took photographs,” The Times, January 11, 2006.
[5] “Child abuse sentence ‘disgusting’ BBC News, 27 August, 2004.
[6] ‘Mother of Sex Offender’ by “Dianne,” Age 57, Columbia, SC. http://www.deargeorgeletters.blogspot.com/
[7] ‘Outrage after Teen Gets 10 Years for Oral Sex with Girl’ ABC News February 7th 2006, to find out more about Genarlow Wilson’s appeal, visit http://www.wilsonappeal.com.
[8] ‘Life in the shadows’ – Now facing a legal challenge, Georgia’s war on sex offenders could punish minor violators while failing to focus on the worst ones By Scott Henry, July 19, 2006.
[9] p.9; Folk Devils and Moral Panics the Creation of the Mods and Rockers by Stanley Cohen, 1973, published by Paladin.
[10] Research and Development Statistics (RDS)Home Office UK, Crime in England and Wales, 2004/2005 http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/
[11] ‘Megan’s Law,’ was passed after seven year-old Megan Kanka was raped and murdered by a paroled convict who had moved onto her street in New Jersey in 1994. Photos and addresses of all high-risk, Class 3 sex offenders are to be posted on the Internet.
[12] “Moral Panics and the Social Construction of Deviant Behavior: A Theory and Application to the Case of Child Ritual Abuse”, by Jeffrey S. Victor, Social Perspectives Autumn 1998.

Save

The Sex Establishment V: “Normaphiliacs” and Freudian Slips

“This condition had no name, under the pen of Freud it would become the Oedipus complex and create a universal pathology for the sole purpose that he could be less alone [with his creation].” […] Here is the key to the Freudian epistemology: the extrapolation of a universal theory from a personal adventure.”

– Michel Onfray, Le crépuscule d’une idole – l’affabulation freudienne (Twilight of the Idol – The Freudian Fable) 


In the 21st century we have the results of various social engineering programmes made manifest. Alfred Kinsey managed to contribute to the gradual detachment of sex from love, and the fragmentation of family and community cohesion by placing the sexual act at top of the pleasure pyramid as an end in itself. As we saw in the previous post, the pathologising and mainstreaming of minority orientation and encouragement of greater and more extreme forms of unlimited sexual expression produced the prevalence of promiscuity and body-centric values which then became a dominant part of culture. This went beyond mere tolerance and acceptance of different forms of sexual identity and preference. It has led to acts of perversion as cool, anonymous sex as normal and sacred union based on love as old fashioned and silly.

That is not to say that we must all toe the line of heterosexual sex or that there is a right or wrong way to express ones sexuality. The key issue here is being true to yourself and whether or not sexuality and sex has been engineered in a certain direction and if it has benefited societies. If that is so, as I believe, then the choices presented to us as we are growing up are not choices at all, but a product of perception management. Are we getting closer to a greater understanding of not just our sexuality, but our place in the world or are we experiencing one expression of an endemic pathology that is tainting our sexual and emotional selves under cover of “normality”?

Are we roaming further and further away from our innate human potential while believing the opposite?

By delving into the reality of psychopathy within our socio-political institutions we might be able to find the answer.


  nrm_1415950011-fifty-shades-second-trailer

Screen shot from the film ‘Fifty Shades of Grey’ (2013) based on the book of the same name which involves a young woman’s exploration into sexual practices involving bondage/discipline, dominance/submission, and sadism/masochism (BDSM). The book became a global best seller with 90 million sold worldwide by 2013.

Professor Amy Bonomi chairperson and professor in Michigan State University’s Department of Human Development and Family Studies conducted extensive studies which show that young adult women who read “Fifty Shades of Grey” are more likely than nonreaders to exhibit unhealthy behaviours. These include: eating disorders, binge drinking, having verbally abusive partners and a predeliction for multiple sexual partners. In other words, when films and books glorify and thereby normalise a narcissistic and/or psychopathic perception of reality, we can hardly be surprised that young people begin to exhibit stress and personality deformations. Or as Miriam Grossman M.D. observed: “There’s nothing grey about Fifty Shades of Grey. It’s all black.” 


The sexual revolution was in large part a triumph of emotional immaturity and anonymous sex with women and men reflecting a caricature of their gender roles: literal objects to use and consume as a true reflection of our consumer society. Sure, there was also genuine examples of a mystical liberation through sex to which our pagan ancestors connected. There is no doubt that nature and the body was synonymous with a spark of ecstasy, a way to commune with God which developed into the cults of Dionysus and Bacchus and other body-centric, sensual rituals. The body as a bio-chemical conduit for achieving altered states can give that mystical “high” in the same way that drugs can bypass the brain filters and introduce to dimensions beyond the five senses – even if for a moment. Sometimes that’s enough to initiate dramatic change. But it is a short cut to a spiritual union that usually requires years of self development and inner work. Which is why drugs and sex magick tend to backfire. So, too the fire of sexual revolution which liberated more than just blocked emotions and neuroses. Could it be that the pendulum was allowed to swing much to far in the other direction?

As discussed, rather than feminism increasing the freedom of women’s rights in the West, under the elite-sponsored role of sexual emancipation it may have led to less rights for women and less happiness. The sexual freedom that women have rightly struggled for has proved poisonous where the modern woman is either trying to emulate the model of the alpha male in the corporate world or being caught between the false liberation of sexual promiscuity. In between those two poles lies confusion and doubt for women exemplified in the rise in narcissism.

This Kinseyian form of pseudo-scientific justification for abuse seems to be alive and well in the form of the American Psychiatric Association and the psychoanalysis tradition. Back in 2003, The American Psychiatric Association Symposium Debated whether “Paedophilia, Gender-Identity Disorder, Sexual Sadism Should Remain Mental Illnesses.” Psychiatrist Charles Moser of San Francisco’s Institute for the Advanced Study of Human Sexuality and co-author Peggy Kleinplatz of the University of Ottawa presented a paper entitled, “DSM-IV-TR and the Paraphilias: An Argument for Removal.” They argued that people whose sexual interests are atypical, culturally forbidden, or religiously prescribed should not, for those reasons, be labelled mentally ill. These included exhibitionism, fetishism, transvestism, voyeurism, and sadomasochism which are to be viewed as simply another form of sexual expression. They were also calling for paedophilia to be removed from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM). Further, that all of us “normophilics” should allow paraphilias the freedom to be who they are and to remove the label of a mental illness forthwith. Though in the minority, a significant number of members agreed.

Another speaker at the same conference exclaimed: “Any sexual interest can be healthy and life-enhancing…” and “…that society should not discriminate against adults who are attracted to children…” noting that “many beloved authors and public figures throughout history have been high-functioning individuals who could actually be classified as paedophiles.” [1] This debate has continued to the present day.

Firstly, the emphasis is not to ostracise and place a judgment upon those of differing sexual preferences but to assist and heal if these extremes exhibit pathology that is negative to both the individual and the persons who do not harbour the same sexual preference. Healing the self by practicing bondage sado-masochism (BDSM) in the privacy of your own home is fine. Propagandising such a fetish and/or accepting predatory behaviour and sexual confusion as a template for society isn’t the way forward either. A sexual interest can indeed be “Healthy and life enhancing,” depending on which lens we have decided to view reality. Our focus can be tinkered with in order that it may flow in a direction not of our choosing, yet, we follow it by rote all the same.

51lec-Zn-jL-horz

Mainstreaming pathology: You can buy yourself a Black Padded PU Leather Hood “Gimp Mask” for Sensory Deprivation Bondage or be lead round the house on a lead if you so wish.

BDSM_collar_backBDSM dog collar (wikipedia)

It is not a case of whether or not society should be free to choose how to heal and release what we perceive to be natural sexual expressions, but to explore why it is that those sexual preferences have arisen in the first place and if the various factors involved are indeed natural rather than carefully conditioned.

Ethics and values appear to be shifting in favour of a voting consensus that removes mental disorders without any safety net concerning rehabilitation and treatment, which begs the question: from what basis are these disorders or genetic predispositions decreed normal? What appears to be happening here is a spin that suggests that if it is defined as ill or pathological it is outdated and anti-progressive. If it can all be seen as just another deviancy and thus normalised we can all go home and stop being so retrogressive. If it is not an illness but one symptom among many drawn from narcissism or psychopathy, then we have clear and present implications for the safety of our nation’s health, especially children. The legitimisation of psychopathology via the Sex Establishment is joining forces with the politicisation of values that is reshaping our culture.

Paedophilia has qualities that align itself not only towards pathological narcissism but elements of psychopathy. It is interesting that there are a growing number of “scientists” of the behaviourist and psychoanalysis schools that advocate a redefinition of paedophilia rather than a redefinition of causes which could direct resources towards the treatment and prevention of child abuse. This includes learning every possible method of pulling the wool over the eyes of the authorities be it psychiatrist, policeman or lawyer, making the whole question of science, law and sexual freedom an increasingly difficult equation to solve. For to do so, means that we must see the distortion and deformation of sexuality and the sexual predators that personify such a malaise. We must see this through entirely new eyes and as a web of relations intimately connected with psychopaths in power.

Paedophilia and related pathologies may well be a symptom of biological, environmental, and traumatic abuse. It may also be a choice. What is conspicuous by its absence in the above appeals for paedophile rights are the rights of children for whom we must, by virtue of our roles as guardians and protectors, take a positive discrimination in these matters regarding their welfare and safety. People with “sexually unusual” interests, said Charles Moser and co-author Peggy Kleinplatz “may in fact be quite happy and well-adjusted,” which is entirely beside the point. The paedophile’s victims may not be quite so happy and well-adjusted after he has molested them. It is these kinds of remarks that feed into the mainstreaming” of pathologies under the guise of normality which may progressively alter the landscape of mass sexuality and under specific directives – then we have a problem, a problem that is not even the fault of those exhibiting sexual pathologies or otherwise.

We can regard all kinds of pathology and child trauma masquerading as healthy and well-adjusted living. This is not about making judgements about what is right or wrong in our sexuality but rather to question where we draw the line in favour of sexual expression that enriches society rather than infects it; where sexual boundaries are being pushed towards more and more extremes, rather than augmenting social relations.

Is the line between “healthy” and “damaged” becoming blurred here?

It is a contradiction that behind closed doors a select minority of paraphilics and a larger proportion of humanity seek to indulge their fantasies towards violence, fetishism, paedophilia, ritualistic sex and child molestation which may be indicative of a suppressed and learned behaviour caused by inverted and unresolved suffering. Meantime, an entirely different face is presented to the world at large. Genetics may play a significant role whereby traumas are imported down the generational line and impose “bombshells” on the next generation if no other role models exist. Yet what this means for society is the set up between the guardians of over-protection and the guardians of over-liberalisation with the resulting chaos created between the two, where opportunities for creative solutions are forever denied.

Noted luminaries were paedophiles or had paedophilic tendencies. There is certainly an historical basis in fact that much of the Establishment or “high functioning” individuals could be classed as paedophiles and/or child rapists. The nature of government, secret societies, occult fraternities, and religious institutions that offer protection of power and status as a class-based tradition may also offer a sanctuary for such people.

Is there a link that those with deviant sexual expressions gravitate towards that which can offer them cover?

This quote from The American Psychiatric Association sums up this conversive thinking in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders: “302.71 Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder’: ‘The essential feature of this so-called condition is a deficiency or absence of sexual fantasies and desire for sexual activity (Criterion A). There is little motivation to seek stimuli and diminished frustration when deprived of the opportunity for sexual expression. The individual usually does not initiate sexual activity or may only engage in it reluctantly when it is initiated by the partner.” [2]

This illustrates the point and might be drawn directly from Kinseyian sexology. If you do not have sexual fantasies, a desire for sexual activity, little motivation to seek stimuli and little frustration when an opportunity for sexual expression comes your way, or even – horror of horrors – you have minimal interest in sex, then you are abnormal. You have a disorder. Notice too, that the idea of love being a factor in this purely mechanical equation is of little importance. If clinically, the activity or desire itself is no longer classified as a pathology “unless accompanied by distress or interference with normal functioning,” then what is known as zoophilia *can be considered no more functionally different from any other love/sex relationship. Even having sex with a deer can be considered fine and dandy in our paralogical reality as one Wisconsin man’s attorney claimed in his client’s defence that the:‘crimes against sexual morality’ statute prohibits sex with animals, but fails to mention carcasses … “The statute does not prohibit one from having sex with a carcass.” Getting this man off is not the issue but the social and developmental factors governing his desire to see a carcass as sexually fulfilling is obviously the real point of contention. [3]  Paralogical and paramoralistic arguments are employed to suggest that it is perfectly normal for human beings to use animals for sex – be it dog, horse or the neighbour’s parakeet – should the desire be strong enough.

These are extreme examples. Nonetheless, what does this mean for more down-to-earth issues of sexuality? The fusing of definitions of acceptable and pathological become habitual and thus the propensity for normalisation. The manual’s criterion for mental illness appears to be getting both ever more flexible and increasingly restrictive. With a suitably biased psychiatrist, the manual can be used as a way to give undue credence to almost any abnormality or disorder depending on the required outcome. As a tool for removing subversive persons for example, a method to which psychiatry has long since lent itself. For instance, there is still no diagnostic test for schizophrenia or any of the other three hundred so-called mental disorders listed in the current edition. A cursory look at the manual gives the impression that American psychiatry is sometimes a mix of culturally biased, reactive, class-driven moral judgements of what it considers to be abnormal behaviour.

Freud

Sigmund Freud

Sigmund Freud believed that any and all symptoms of perceived dysfunction or neuroses could be sourced from repressed memories, irrevocably tied to a repressed sexuality. Although Freud offered intellectual insights into our understanding of human sexuality, the final analysis reveals that his psychoanalysis was an indication of his own neurosis and sexual abuse which he was busy burying under a grandiose schema of rationalisation.

While casting out any possibility of incest as predatory, he rejected the body in favour of an acute form of biological asceticism; a kind of clinical denial that strangely lent itself to the exact kind of religious conservatism that he was trying to avoid. It may be true that his victims’ pleas for understanding were merely absorbed into his own fragmented, mechanical view of sexuality by turning them all into variations on the theme of Oedipus. His rejection of incest as abusive or traumatic fit perfectly with future psychiatry and Kinseyian programming.  Proven cases of recovered memories were simply ignored. Repressed and false memories can exist but the battle between both is currently being expressed through their respective extremes with money and psychopathy as the deciding factor.

Freud’s simplistic associations have allowed pathocratic principles to burrow deeper into human consciousness and to drop our crumbling defences against the psychopath still further.  Author George K. Simon, Jr., writes in his cautionary book: In Sheep’s Clothing: “The malignant impact of overgeneralizing Freud’s observations about a small group of overly inhibited individuals into a broad set of assumptions about the causes of psychological ill-health in everyone cannot be overstated.” Simon further suggests: “We need a completely different theoretical framework if we are to truly understand, deal with, and treat the kinds of people who fight too much as opposed to those who cower or “run” too much.” [4]

The whole basis upon which Freudian psychoanalytical movement rests is the wholly subjective notion that all psychological illness is rooted in repressed sexual impulses, unconscious incestuous fantasies, the spectre of death and the fear of castration, the latter of which appears to have their roots in the genital mutilation (circumcision) of the Old Testament.  Freudian psychoanalysis has given credence to the myth that girls secretly want to have sex with their fathers for example, which is crude, simplistic and on a par with the generalizations we can find in the Kinsey reports. In fact, if the denial of whatever sexual impulse is at work – whether depraved or perverted – then the basis for finding perversion distasteful must necessarily lie in one’s own unconscious desire for perverse practices. This is a both an intensely paralogical, materialist and nihilistic view of life that has no room for multiple psychotherapeutic dimensions of healing.

The psychoanalytical movement made claims that there’s was a new science when in fact it was nothing more than pseudo-science that developed a cult following. As Bob Altemeyer a Canadian professor of Psychology astutely sums up:  “One gets nowhere with a theory that can ‘predict’ whatever happened, after it happens. Having an answer for everything may make one a great used car salesman, but it rings the death knell for a theory in science. In science, the best explanations are nailed-down-testable.” [5]

814894886Freud: Father of the Cult of Psychoanalysis

While undoubtedly breaking new ground in tapping the unconscious fears that lie within the human psyche, these successes paled in comparison to the fear and loathing of both sexuality and the feminine that Freud seemed to set in motion. Freud’s own neuroses as well as the broader fears of the Jewish culture were injected into this new “science.”

Psychiatrist Hervey M. Cleckley illustrated the cult of psychoanalysis in this way:

Today celebrated psychiatric authors “plainly demonstrate” by methods widely proclaimed as scientific that the chief reason human beings came in time to wear clothing lies in the ever-present influence of a “castration fear” of which they all remain unconscious. Not for protection against the weather, primarily, we are told, or for purposes of adornment, did primitive men and women first don bearskin coats or grass skirts. According to high authority, the real motivation lies deeper, in a universal but unconscious terror felt by each male that a jealous father will amputate his penis. Concealing his genital organs with apparel offers him, it is claimed, a slight measure of protection from this inescapable anxiety. The female (unconsciously), believing herself already dismembered as a punishment for (unconscious) incestuous aims, hastens to cover her mutilation and veil her shame.

Much of the reasoning and investigation classed as dynamic depends upon verbal constructs which can be readily manipulated by the accepted rules to furnish a bogus proof for virtually any assumption the human imagination might contrive. […]From the standpoint of modern operational logic, a theory must be expressed in such a way that it may be proved. This is surely the case with the Freudian theory. On the other hand, from the standpoint of modern methodology, the evidence or experiment which is designed to prove the theory must he one which could have a possible negative outcome and so disprove the theory. At the present time, many of the concepts of psychoanalysis are undoubtedly developed in such a way that only proof and not disproof is possible …[6]

And it is this “bogus proof” and extreme subjectivity that gave the perfect cover for psychoanalysis to gain dominance in psychology, psychiatry and culture. It lent itself not only to misuse but acted as a gateway for any and all interpretations. Disagreements with Freud’s and his associates’ interpretations were summarily dismissed as products of “resistance.”  This was a word used by Freud to illustrate the reluctance patients showed in speaking of painful or humiliating experiences during the process of analysis. He believed this resistance: “… often utilized the mechanism of repression to remove or to withhold from consciousness impulses or memories which the patient found it particularly unpleasant to accept and admit as his own.” [7] Therefore, when the medical psychology community did not accept these chief concepts Freud put this down to the theory of resistance thereby placing constructive criticism into a box he could padlock at will.

In the early part of the twentieth until the post war period, psychoanalysis firmly stamped its mark on the subconscious of the West. Although the diversity of psychology, psychotherapy and alternative medicine has diluted Freud’s power the legacy of his influence lives on as it did most strongly in the 1950s.  As Cleckley outlines:

If a psychiatrist cannot accept as adequate the evidence Freud offers for his claim that at age four this patient was intensely motivated by a specific desire for his father to practice sodomy upon him, and was restrained in these inclinations by a fear of castration, he must be prepared to defend himself against the argument that similar (unconscious) desires and fears are determining factors in the dissident opinion. So, too, the critic who cannot accept the popular concept of universal bisexuality lays himself open to suspicions that an unrecognized homosexual tendency within himself, probably one of more than ordinary magnitude, is playing an important part in his alleged failure to accept evidence and react to it normally. [8]

Dr. Cleckley highlights the fact that Freud’s cherished beliefs do not necessarily equate with rigorous science. Politics and religion are bastions of such authoritarian, fear-based thinking that imposes the same fundamentalist beliefs upon others. Psychoanalysis is no different, which is why it has fallen out of favour in more recent times. The idea that those who disagree with the methods of the Freudian approach are somehow expressing resistance and respond: “…with unconscious longings to emulate the very thing being criticised is obviously a ridiculous simplification. The idea that the roots of all neuroses are from the repression of the procreative, biological sex impulse is equally fallacious.”

Perhaps the most revealing legacy of psychoanalysis is offered from author and consultant on abusive men and family issues, Lundy Bancroft.  He wrote about Freud’s discovery at the turn of the 19th Century, of just how many of his female patients revealed instances of incest by their fathers and brothers. Early in his career Freud came to the conclusion that child sexual abuse was a key issue in emotional illness in adult women which resulted in his famous paper: “The Aetiology of Hysteria.” He reminds us it was at this juncture that Freud, so keen to be accepted by his peers found himself ridiculed and rejected for proposing such a thing. How could it possibly be that pillars of society with unimpeacable reputations could be perpetrators of incest? It was unthinkable. The results of this shock to Freud’s intellectual pride and the consequences for the future of psychology were enormous:

Within a few years, Freud buckled under this heavy pressure and recanted his conclusions. In their place he proposed the “Oedipus complex,” which became the foundation of modern psychology. According to this theory any young girl actually desires sexual contact with her father, because she wants to compete with her mother to be the most special person in his life. Freud used this construct to conclude that the episodes of incestuous abuse his clients had revealed to him had never taken place; they were simply fantasies of events the women had wished for when they were children and that the women had come to believe were real. This construct started a hundred-year history in the mental health field of blaming victims for the abuse perpetrated on them and outright discrediting of women’s and children’s reports of mistreatment by men. Once abuse was denied in this way, the stage was set for some psychologists to take the view that any violent or sexually exploitative behaviors that couldn’t be denied—because they were simply too obvious—should be considered mutually caused. Psychological literature is thus full of descriptions of young children who “seduce” adults into sexual encounters and of women whose “provocative” behavior causes men to become violent or sexually assaultive toward them.”

Bancroft is under no illusions that the cultural influence of psychoanalysis remains strong and offers an anecdote from his experience to illustrate the point:

A psychologist who is currently one of the most influential professionals nationally in the field of custody disputes writes that women provoke men’s violence by “resisting their control” or by “attempting to leave.” She promotes the Oedipus complex theory, including the claim that girls wish for sexual contact with their fathers. In her writing she makes the observation that young girls are often involved in “mutually seductive” relationships with their violent fathers, and it is on the basis of such “research” that some courts have set their protocols. The Freudian legacy thus remains strong.”

We shortly discover just how strong this belief really is as we look further into the various expressions of abuse presently rising to surface within society.

 


* Zoophilia (from the Greek Zoon, “animal”, and Philia, “friendship or love”) is a paraphilia, defined as an affinity or sexual attraction by a human to non-human animals. Such individuals are called zoophiles. See Appendix 3 for further paraphilias.

Notes

[1] “Should These Conditions Be Normalized?” American Psychiatric Association Symposium Debates Whether Paedophilia, Gender-Identity Disorder, Sexual Sadism Should Remain Mental Illnesses By Linda Ames Nicolosi, http://www.narth.com/
[2] American Psychiatric Association’s DMH  (p. 496)
[3] ‘Sex With Dead Deer Not Illegal – Lawyer Argues’ The Register, November 11, 2006.
[4] In Sheep’s Clothing – Understanding and Dealing with Manipulative People by George K. Simon, Jr. PhD. Published by AJ Christopher & Co. 2000.
[5] p.54.The Authoritarians by Bob Altemeyer, Associate Professor Department of Psychology, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada, 2006 by Bob Altemeyer
[6] op. cit. Cleckley (p.112)
[7] Ibid. (p.117)
[8] Ibid. (p.118 / p.99-100)
“Freud’s long report published under the title From the History of an Infantile Neurosis can, I believe, be taken as a typical example of this work. In it a dream recalled by the twenty-six-year-old patient as having occurred when he was four years of age is confidently interpreted. The chief conclusions reached about this patient appear to be based fundamentally on this interpretation. Freud reports the entire dream as follows:
‘I dreamt that it was night and that I was lying in my bed. (My bed stood with its foot towards the window; in front of the window there was a row of old walnut trees. I know it was winter when I had the dream, and night-time.) Suddenly the window opened of its own accord, and I was terrified to see that some white wolves were sitting on the big walnut tree in front of the window. There were six or seven of them. The wolves were quite white, and looked more like Foxes or sheep-dogs, for they had big tails like foxes and they had their ears pricked like dogs when they are attending to something. In a great terror, evidently of being eaten up by the wolves, I screamed and woke up…
’The only piece of action in the dream was the opening of the window; for the waives sat quite still and without any movement on the branches of the tree, to the right and left of the trunk, and looked at me. It seemed as though they had riveted their whole attention upon me,Freud draws from this dream a number of conclusions by interpreting its various items symbolically. From its association with a few fairy tales familiar to the patient in childhood and with some not particularly extraordinary early memories he devises an astonishing explanation of the patient’s illness. Freud confidently states that the dream reveals in considerable detail an experience the patient was subjected to approximately two and a half years earlier, when he was eighteen months old.
Fragment after fragment of the dream is used by Freud to derive proof that the infant at that time saw his parents while they were having sexual intercourse.He is quite confident that the dream reveals that the parents had intercourse three times in succession while the infant observed them and also that the a tergo position was chosen for their activities. He maintains also that the patient, at eighteen months of age, was so affected by this scene that he had a bowel movement as a pretext to make an outcry and interrupt the parents in their still enthusiastic love-making. In this interpretation the number of the wolves, which the patient recalled as being six or seven, is regarded as an effect of the dreamer’s unconscious processes to disguise what he had really seen—that is to say, the two parents.
The fact that the dream scene is quite stationary and the wolves make no movement is accepted as evidence (by reversal) for vigorous coital activity by the amorous couple.The appearance of keen attention noticeable in the dream-wolves who stood in the tree, according to Freud, indicates an intense and absorbing interest on the part of the infant in what he was watching. The fact that the four-year-old boy experienced fear of the wolves in his dream is said by Freud to represent a terror experienced earlier by the infant at the sight of his mother’s external genital organs when seen as an infant of eighteen months.
The interpreter assumes without question that this alleged sight contributed to the belief that the mother had been mutilated sexually. From these points Freud reaches the confident conclusion that when the boy at four years of age had the dream he was suffering from a profound dread of castration by his father. The fact that the wolves who appeared in the dream are remembered as having particularly long tails is considered sound evidence of an opposite state (taillessness) and hence a substantial confirmation of this disquieting dread.
This preoccupation is said by Freud to have been the chief deterrent to this four-year-old boy’s dominating impulse, assumed to be a specific and strong yearning for his father to carry out upon him sexual relations per anum. In the entire report no item of objective evidence is offered to support these conclusions. Freud appears, however, to be completely convinced that all this is correct and adequately established. In fact, he insists that his whole study of this case must be ‘all a piece of nonsense from start to finish, or everything took place just as I have described it above.’

[9] Bancroft, Lundy; Why Does He Do That?: Inside the Minds of Angry and Controlling Men published by Berkley Books (2003) (kindle edition)

The Sex Establishment IV: “Sexual Attitude Restructuring” (SARS)

[Alfred Kinsey’s] “…methodology and sampling technique virtually guaranteed that he would find what he was looking for.”

– James Jones, Kinsey biographer,


Keeping our ideas of ponerology in mind, it seems what Reisman calls the “Sex Establishment” was tasked with a progressive ponerisation of our attitudes to sex and love. As we will discover in later posts, this may have been a spoke in the wheel of a much wider social engineering agenda.

The pioneering academic sex study centres under scrutiny are The Institute for the Advanced Study of Human Sexuality (IASHS) – thereafter called the “Sex Institute”- which offers extensive training and advanced degrees originally directed by Penthouse Forum Board member and Kinsey co-author, Dr. Wardell B. Pomeroy, and Hustler Magazine contributors, Drs’. Ted Mcllvena and Erwin Haberlae. The accreditation curricula includes a wide variety of Kinsey inspired material such as the Sex Institute’s degree program which includes:“ ‘advanced graduate’ studies such as: ‘erotic sensate and massage therapy,’ and focuses most of its scholarly training on student viewing, using and even making, ‘erotic’ films … And the “training in the design and implementation of ‘sex education curricula’ for all ages.”  [1]

Kinsey6Alfred C. Kinsey

So, we have Dr. Pomeroy, co-author and a Kinsey Institute principle, who recommended incest as beneficial to the juvenile to adult readers of Penthouse, Chic, and other magazines and for whom a belief in “positive incest” allows him to still teach child sexuality.

What is more interesting is that:

“These now-accredited Sex Institute experts commonly testify for sex offenders and for businesses which specialize in the production of … pornography. ‘Experts’ from the American Sex Establishment regularly testify in courts and provide their expertise to legislatures and other public agencies.  For example, in 1980, Wardell Pomeroy testified for a pornographer in Happy Day v. Kentucky, a court case in which Pomeroy admitted under oath to seeking funds from the sex industry to produce his own child pornography.” [2]

This may go a little way in explaining the present chaos in the European and US courts in cases of child abuse and custody cases. Though courses under the IASHS curricula offer historical, psychological, anthropological and psychodynamic training, the overwhelming mission is a distinctly Kinseyian one.

One particular form of sexual education in the San Francisco “Sex Institute” and in other universities comes under the formal sounding Sexual Attitude Restructuring (SAR) (now known as “Restructuring”). According to wikipedia entry SARS “is not a traditional academic experience designed to disseminate cognitive information, nor is it psychotherapy directed toward the resolution of personal problems”. What apparently SARS proposes to do – though this is without a citation – is to provide: “… an opportunity for participants to explore and understand their beliefs, attitudes, values and biases within the realm of sex and sexuality.” And according to Kinseyian principles, of course.

Promulgated by Pomeroy himself this process is said to achieve a shift in pedagogical attitude and teaching by incorporating specific images of a hard and soft-core nature which also happens to: “scars the viewer’s brain as it short circuits his and her conscience.” This is particularly interesting in light of ponerological aspects of psychopathy that inflict a progressive dissonance that effectively cuts off the ability to express higher feelings such as empathy. The entrainment of SAR is said to erode “emotional refinements by using high resonance images that “psychopharmacologically and neurochemically mold, coarsen and reform viewer’s brains, minds and memories.” In effect, it channels sexual energy to a strictly mechanical and animalistic perception of sexuality and in Pomeroy’s words: “The SAR is designed to ‘desensitize,’ that is to disinhibit, all viewers.” [3]

This has a particular resonance with the CIA-led mind programming operations under the generic term of MK-ULTRA in the 1950s and 60s. Kinsey himself was indirectly associated with some of the main proponents of such mind experimentation. With Rockefeller funding, one cannot help but wonder if these are offshoots of that same secret research which became purposely mainstreamed into academia.

eatenawareness

© Infrakshun

Even before Kinsey left his intensive study of Gall wasps and launched into the field of sexuality, he was an ardent eugenicist who “recommended that a portion of the ‘lower classes’ be sterilized to foster a more robust gene pool.” [4]  It becomes more worrisome when eugenics appears so frequently as a prominent principle behind Kinsey’s drive to collect “data” as it does with so many of the academic and intelligentsia of his day. For instance, Dr. Herrmann Muller, a co-worker at IU for several years had done research at the “Sex Institute” in Berlin, since it was illegal in the United States. It was also at a time when the German Eugenics programs had full academic approval since before the 1920s, as a definite precursor to Hitler’s Nazi Germany.  In 1943, fellow eugenicist and infamous “scientist” Dr. Ewen Cameron became a fellow Rockefeller guarantor. In 1973 as president of the American Psychiatric Association, Dr. Cameron was a covert CIA “mind-control” researcher who conducted human experiments outside the borders of the United States, at McGill University in Canada, for CIA director Allen Dulles.

Satanist, Aleister Crowley, American Nazi George Sylvester Viereck, aforementioned French paedophile Rene Guyon and occultist film maker Kenneth Anger were all friends and acquaintances of Kinsey. Anger commented on Kinsey as follows:

“Kinsey was obsessed with obtaining the Great Beast’s (Crowley’s) day-to-day sex diaries … To obtain grant monies and maintain the support of the university, Kinsey needed the excuse of research to validate his twenty-four-hours-a-day obsession with sex. However, Prok’s (Kinsey’s nickname) battle cry of ‘Do your best and let other people react as they will’ seemed a variation on Crowley’s ‘Do what thou wilt’ maxim. i.e. ‘Do what thou wilt is the whole of the law’ ”. [5]

Granted, we have no way of knowing the truth of Anger’s claims but the historical saga does not end there. With eugenics, Nazism, and Sex-Magick topping the Kinsey bill, this already heady brew may account for the suspicions which eventually surrounded the so called father of the “Sexual Revolution” and which contributed to an equally dubious counter-culture. His personal and professional life, clearly exhibited a pathological obsession with the mechanics of sex. When you mix a sexual obsessive with the above mentioned friends and acquaintances then it becomes clear that Kinsey’s influence could have contributed to the sexual ponerisation of society more than any other single individual. But as we know – no-one acts in isolation.

It is interesting that Kinsey’s research conveniently excluded incest and physical abuse/battery yet focused entirely on the more salacious aspects of deviancy giving them undue credence, effectively normalising them to the point that perversion and pathology is often a part of mainstream culture. For a man famous for harbouring some very dark sexual demons indeed (and regaling his party friends with the fact that he could insert a toothbrush into his penis, bristle-end first (?) it is safe to say that the type of science he carried out and the subsequent Sexual Revolution he birthed bears the same indelible stamp. [6]

The Kinsey sex studies reported that: “95 percent of American males had violated sex laws seriously enough to put them in jail, 85 percent had experienced premarital sex, 69 percent had used prostitutes, 45 percent were adulterers, as high as 37 percent had experienced orgasm in a homosexual act, and that 17 percent had had sex with an animal.” While this may appear pedestrian to the sensation-saturated 21 century, in 1948 it was shocking in the extreme. [7]

We see the same play-offs between the Christian-right and the liberal left, the former seeing him as a child molesting monster and the latter as a great pioneer and deliverer from the last throes of Victorian values and sexual Puritanism.

In reality, neither is correct.

He was very likely used by such overseers as the Rockefellers for his talents and his well-placed sexual psychopathy to act as one of many shapers of society. Persons such as Kinsey and his sponsors may have played on the lowest instincts in man and brought them to the surface to play an active part in the erosion of family, community and for a laissez-faire mentality to reign. Many of these ex-Kinseyian staff and sexologists are now within the court system pronouncing judgements on who is fit and proper to look after children in custody cases or whether or not sex offenders should be locked up or released into community care…

The effects of the Kinsey reports cannot be underestimated. They were after all, used as education templates within academia, government, charities and non-governmental organisations such as UNESCO where official documents incorporated and promoted an elite package of  humanist, eugenics and Kinseyian themes.

The Kinsey Institute and Indiana University haven’t rested on their laurels. They are still carrying out further “studies” with great gusto.

kinseyapp

Screenshot of the “Kinsey Reporter” a mobile smart phone app which logs random data on sexuality for reasons unknown, but certainly not for scientific knowledge.

At kinseyreporter.org/ they have produced a smart phone app to track sexual activity of users across the globe. It is difficult to know what purpose it serves other than the reinforcement of Kinseyian themes and titillation With a proven flawed metholodology for which the Kinsey Institute is most famous, this hasn’t stopped them from producing a: “… global mobile survey platform to share, explore, and visualize anonymous data about sex.” And where these “scientific”
reports “… are submitted via smartphone, then explored on this website or downloaded for off-line analysis”. None of the information generated qualifies as research or science since there is nothing scientific whatsoever in this data collection. In the same way as the Kinsey reports were completely random and unscientific in their methodology as well as a blatant example of well-funded social engineering, the Kinsey Reporter app follows the same low standards for maintaining the momentum of behavioural change through unrepresentative, unreliable and unverifiable methods which are inherently open to imagination and fabrication.

In summary, the Kinsey Institute reinforces its lack of credibility with more attempts to claim it is conducting scientific research. However, if we view the Kinsey Reporter as another tool of SMART society and the perfect avenue in which to promote Kinseyian sexualisation for societies around the world, then this is a very effective tool. It is another example of how pervasive Kinseyian beliefs have become.

Though it would seem that the most vociferous Kinsey critics are predominantly right wing, “apple-pie” conservatives, they do have considerable justification for their outrage. Admittedly, while foaming-at-the-mouth with Christian indignation doesn’t help and may even obscure the truth, it would be extremely foolish to write off all of their objections as prudish “judgment day” invective. Similarly, it could be said that Kinsey did provide partially valuable data regarding the sexual mores of middle America and that he was genuinely interested in such “research” it is highly likely that he used this as a convenient method by which he could satisfy his paedophilic fantasies and sexual obsessions of sado-masochism, voyeurism, child pornography and molestation.

According to biographer James H. Jones, he was “among the most influential Americans of the twentieth century.” If so, then you can be sure he was used for a specific purpose. Many sexologists and academics dislike having their beloved godfather of sex toppled from his mantle, but when the evidence is carefully pondered, Kinsey’s own sexual demons suggest they had become the driving force in his research, fully exploited by those who provided funding. When one puts the Rockefeller foundation in the driving seat it leaves a decidedly uncomfortable feeling that Kinsey’s detractors are onto something, yet they are shackled by accusations of fundamentalism and undue adherence to parochial, middle-American family values.

In 1948, Dr. Kinsey publicly advocated that adults engage in sexual relations with children, making the “scientific” finding that they “derived definite pleasure” from sexual use by adults. Kinsey wrote those children’s screams of pain, their striking and struggling to get away from their “partner” were all supporting evidence of the child subject’s pleasure from sexual contact with an adult “trained observer.” Dr. Reisman wrote that: “While it is clearly established that these above children’s responses were obtained by adult male child sex offenders, the Kinsey group accepts child offender/evidence re: the child victims.”

Knowing that the nature of the sexual predator in our midst is highly manipulative and with an almost supra natural cunning, it is not without good reason that this is exactly the kind of niche post that such individuals seek out where their molestations can then proceed undetected through a variety of ingenious covers. Teachers, priests, occult students, government officials and sex researchers cloaked by science: all offer the potential for secrecy and Establishment protection for psychopaths to “do as they wilt.”

Mr. Kinsey at no time allowed the question of morality to determine what was scientifically acceptable and went way beyond the bounds of perceived bourgeois repression and conservative restrictions. Perhaps the doctor did indeed have his own mandated stamp of approval that allowed him to do as he pleased and strengthened by the social naiveté concerning the dynamics of psychopaths at the time, which was even more in awe of academic and social status. Which makes the following quote from the Doctor even more delusional:

“We are the recorders and reporters of facts — not the judges of the behaviors we describe.” – Dr. Alfred Kinsey

Clearly, Kinsey was a follower of the Goebbels propaganda principle that “… when one lies, one should lie big and stick to it.”

And the Kinsey Institute have carried on this legacy to great effect.

 


Notes

[2] op. cit. Reisman (pp. 172-174,)
[3] Ibid. | See also pp. 174-175 and the following extract: “In December 1982, George Leonard reported his Attitude Restructuring (SAR) experience in Esquire magazine. [Esquire: The End of Sex, p. 24]   Noting at least 60,000 people trained in colleges and university by the SAR beginning in the early 1980s, Leonard expects his experience is typical: The sensory overload culminated on Saturday night in a multi-media event called the F—korama … in the darkness … images of human beings – and some-times even animals — engaging in every conceivable sexual act, accompanied by wails, squeals, moans, shouts, and the first movement of the Tchaikovsky Violin Concerto.  Some seventeen simultaneous moving pictures … Over a period of several hours, there came a moment when the four images on the wall were of a gay male couple, a straight couple, a lesbian couple, and a bestial group.  The subjects were nude,..I felt myself becoming disoriented … was she kissing a man or a woman?  I struggled to force the acts I was watching into their proper boxes … and now I couldn’t remember which was which.  Wasn’t I supposed to make these discriminations?  I searched for clues.  There were none.  I began to feel uncomfortable.  Soon I realized that to avoid vertigo and nausea I would have to give up the attempt to discriminate and simply surrender to the experience … The differences for which lives have been ruined, were not only trivial, but invisible.  By the end … Nothing was shocking….But nothing was sacred either.  But as I drove home, I began to get a slightly uneasy feeling.  It was almost as if I had been conned … by my own conditioned response of taking the most liberated position … whatever my deeper feelings…. love had not been mentioned a single time during the entire weekend.”
[4] p.57; Alfred C. Kinsey :A Public/Private Life by James H. Jones, published by W W Norton & Co Inc. 1997 | ISBN: 0393040860.
[5] ‘Sex Experiments of Alfred Kinsey.’ by Jim Keith. 1999.
[6] ‘Alfred’s brush with pleasure’ By Roy Porter , professor in the social history of medicine, Wellcome Institute for the History of Medicine, London.Times Higher Education Supplement, 14 November 1997.
[7] ‘On Kinsey’s German, Nazi Pedophile Aide; The New York Times Asks: “Alfred Kinsey: Liberator or Pervert?’ By Dr. Judith Reisman, ‘The Kinsey Coverup’ February 4, 2007 | http://www.drjudithreisman.com/

The Sex Establishment III: The Kinsey Legacy

“The only unnatural sex act is that which you cannot perform.”

– Alfred C. Kinsey


As the US government gives Viagra to paedophiles and Europe offers Prozac to children, we could be forgiven for thinking that the world is indulging some very dark humour. Bizarre contradictions and paramoralistic laws are in place to facilitate such oddities. [1] Meantime, utter confusion of identity and sexual orientation is being normalised with the fostering of sexual expression that is nothing short of perverse; where pain, suffering and degradation are just “normal” indicators of a “liberal” society finding itself at last. Something is being found all right, but it doesn’t seem to be along the path to a more creative society.

Psychiatry that twists the nature of paedophilia and child molestation to pander for narcissistic desires seems to have partially taken root from the research of Dr. Alfred Kinsey. He and his co-researchers shaped our perceptions of sex and sexual habits and eventually inaugurated the “sexual revolution” and the age of “free love.” Under ponerological influences however, this could never end well. The time was certainly ripe to explore Western sexuality but it seems, once again, this need for awareness and healthy exploration was hijacked.

This culminated in Kinsey’s highly influential book: Sexual Behavior in the Human Male published in 1948 where 200,000 copies of the book were sold within the first two months of its publication. It was followed by his 1953 companion volume Sexual Behavior in the Human Female, which was seen as pioneering by most in the scientific Establishment, proof of which was sealed when Kinsey appeared on the cover of Establishment mouth-piece Time magazine in the same year.

To some he is one of the great minds in the science of sexuality. To others, he is merely one of many sexual psychopaths given the task of ensuring that our sexuality remains irrevocably distorted.

Kinsey-Time-1953-08-24

Alfred Kinsey on the cover of Establishment rag ‘TIME’ in 1953

The UK’s Channel Four television programme Secret History: Kinsey’s Paedophiles, first broadcast in October 1998, revealed some interesting facts about Kinsey’s research where the so called “normal sexuality” of test subjects was displaced in favour of an inordinately high number of persons imprisoned for criminal sexual deviancy. Interviews took place with prostitutes, child molesters, rapists and an assortment of petty criminals and the collected information entered into a database as normal examples of the population. There were suspiciously high levels of homosexuality and bestiality. Under the new spirit of “scientific” sexual emancipation however, this wasn’t deemed so…sexy.  Moreover, his research department staffed by young males and females were expected to reveal their sexual histories and participate in explicit sex movies that were shot in Kinsey’s attic … All for research purposes, of course. In summary, the scientific methodology of data collection, statistical analysis and the results that followed were all deeply flawed. [2]

What was perhaps most controversial were the methods by which Alfred Kinsey obtained child orgasms. He stated confidently: “We have now reported observation on such specifically sexual activities as erection, pelvic thrusts, and several other characteristics of true orgasm in a list of 317 pre-adolescent boys ranging between infants of five months and adolescence in age.”

Come again? Did anyone at all consider this a red flag? Apparently not.

table34Table 34 from ‘Sexual Behavior in the Human Male’

This included the use of stop watches and “stimulation” of children’s genitals in order to time the duration of response leading to orgasm. His claims that infants “measured in the nursery with special instruments, were found to experience orgasms at the age of four or five months” and that “[o]ne preadolescent child had 26 orgasms in 24 hours,” apparently never caused researchers concern as to how he gathered this data. Indeed, Kinsey’s obsessions with infant and child reactions to stimulation was due to his own paedophilic tendencies.John Bancroft, M.D., emeritus director of the Kinsey Institute, confirmed this preoccupation as the driving forc behind his research in his paper, “Alfred Kinsey and the Politics of Sex Research” by stating that Kinsey was “particularly interested in the observation of adults who had been sexually involved with children.” [3]

What is even more worrying about the experiments, and certainly Kinsey’s own ability to interpret basic human distress is the descriptions he gives associated with infants and children during and after orgasm: “sobbing, or more violent cries, sometimes with an abundance of tears (especially among younger children) … extreme trembling, collapse, loss of color, and sometimes fainting …,” “pained or frightened” expression, and “violent attempts to avoid climax …” [4] Testament to Kinsey psychopathology or ambition (or both) despite these reactions, he concluded that children, “derive definite pleasure from the situation.”

One wonders whose perception of “pleasure” he was really talking about.

According to arch Kinsey critic Judith A. Reisman’s research: “… anywhere from 317 boy infants and 2,035 total children” were subjected to the sex experiments for the Kinsey data in Chapter 5 of the Male and Female volumes of his reports. Kinsey’s methodology could be seen as obvious forms of abuse yet this did not seem to worry academics at the Indiana University of his day, nor those who are happy to highlight what might be labelled Reisman’s religious even conservative beliefs, but do not have answers for the questions she raises. The very nature of his research that focused on detailed charts of orgasmic toddlers and infants must lead us to re-evaluate the motives of such research.

It is now common knowledge that Kinsey’s sources for this data came from none other than: “… habitual paedophiles whom Kinsey encouraged to keep careful records of their ‘contacts’ with children, even suggesting that they time the ‘orgasms’ which these children supposedly experienced. One such Kinsey correspondent was a man who claimed to have molested hundreds of children, while another was … a Nazi storm trooper who sexually exploited children in occupied Poland and was eventually accused of murdering a 10-year-old girl in post-war Germany.” [5]

To say that there there were gargantuan flies in the ointment of scientfic rigour would be an enormous understatement.

What were the real reasons that lay behind Kinsey’s sponsored obsessions and why was his own paedophilia, and sadomasochistic preferences overlooked so comprehensively?  Even before the more bizarre aspects of Kinsey’s methodology came to light, the source of his funding provides a clue.

kinseyThe original patron of the Kinsey research in 1938 was the publicly funded Indiana University. In this case, it was the National Research Council and the Rockefeller Foundation who have had a long pedigree in social engineering under the cover of philanthropy as well as Nazi business dealings and psychological experimentation via none other than Joseph Mengele (an individual we will explore further in later posts).  The Rockefeller patriarchs also pioneered the support of eugenics in Germany and America and the belief in depopulation as an answer to poverty and “bad breeding.” Marketed as a philanthropic family with its many charitable and educational organisations, its history tells a somewhat different story.  [6]  Reisman states: “…The Rockefeller Foundation’s knowledge of the research flaws [in Kinsey’s data] is certain; however, they continued to fund its use in the Model Penal Code anyway.” [7]

They did so because their objective wasn’t to improve society’s sexual habits but to impose their own agenda.

She continues:

The continuously repeated misrepresentation by Rockefeller and Indiana University that Kinsey had a “well-developed methodology” is refuted by the 1950 report from Warren Weaver, then director of the Natural Science Division of the Rockefeller Foundation.  He documented for the Foundation what would have been an insurmountable fact for honorable men: that Kinsey’s data were totally invalid statistically. However, this stubborn scientific fact did not stop the official actions of the Rockefeller Foundation. By 1950, Rockefeller was funding the American Law Institute with the mission to re-craft “fixed” American law including the state laws regarding sex offenders based upon Kinsey’s invalid research. [Emphasis mine]

Without the support of the Rockefeller foundation it is unlikely that Kinsey’s work would have been allowed to come to fruition. What is important to keep in mind is that Rockefeller and Kinsey were on the same perceptual page, a belief that went far beyond the idea of liberating humanity from sexual repression but actively encouraging sexual mores that would inevitably swing to its polar opposite. To understand this better one needs to get inside the beliefs of the Rockefellers and others of their ilk, something we’ll come back to later on in this series.

Although Judith Reisman certainly has her own religious belief, she is more than qualified both academically and from her own experiences of abuse (her daughter was abused at 13) to offer compelling evidence that Kinsey was not what he seemed. She illustrates the depth of Kinsey’s subterfuge and the historical forces behind his placement via an extensive and meticulous research into what has been called the “Kinsey model” which is now used in many institutions and law courts all over America, often by proponents and advocates of Kinsey’s findings. Mix in narcissism, misguided feminism, reflexive political correctness, erroneous psychiatric evaluation atop endemic corruption and it is difficult to see how progress can be made under the current social engineering that makes up our current system of laws.

Reisman summarized the Kinsey Model in the following list from which the Kinsey team suggested to Americans that if they follow their conclusions derived from the analysis of human sexual conduct, American society would benefit in innumerable ways.  Kinsey’s “findings” included the following, suitably buttressed by the traditions of Freudian psychoanalysis to help them along:

  • All orgasms are ‘outlets’ and equal between husband and wife, boy and dog, man and boy, girl, or baby – for there is no abnormality and no normality.
  • As the aim of coitus is orgasm, the more orgasms from any ‘outlet,’ at the earliest age – the healthier the person.
  • Early masturbation is critical for sexual, physical and emotional health.  It can never be excessive or pathological.
  • Sexual taboos and sex laws are routinely broken, thus all such taboos and sex laws should be eliminated, including that of rape and child rape, unless serious ‘force’ is used and serious harm is proven.
  • Since sex is, can, and should be commonly shared with anyone and anything, jealousy is passé.
  • All sexual experimentation before marriage will increase the likelihood of a successful long-term marriage and venereal disease and other socio-sexual maladies will be reduced dramatically.
  • Human beings are naturally bisexuals Religious bigotry and prejudice forces people into chastity, heterosexuality and monogamy.
  • Children are sexual and potentially orgasmic from birth (‘womb to tomb’); are unharmed by incest, adult/child sex, and often benefit thereby.
  • There is no medical or other reason for adult-child sex or incest to be forbidden.
  • All forms of sodomy are natural and healthy.
  • Homosexuals represent ten to thirty-seven percent of the population or more. (Kinsey’s findings were always very fluid on this point.) Some educators have interpreted his findings by saying that only four to six percent of the population are exclusively heterosexual so the ‘heterosexual’ bias in the US should be eliminated. [8]

Reisman provides evidence that these “findings” and the 1948 Kinsey model as a whole, were swiftly incorporated into the educational establishment, including the health and social services, the military and most commonly from a Kinseyian “variant” sex model that draws heavily on the above. It is not difficult to see how these models have contributed to the effects we now see in our societies.

The net psychological fallout from this was not merely the hope of releasing sexual hang ups and “blockages” that might be interfering with one’s sexual identity or the ability to lead fulfilling lives. No one would say that this could not be viewed as positive. But what the Kinsey report actually served to do was to create a climate that was sourced not only from faulty data but to inculcate a preference for the pathological.

kinsey505x476

Alfred C. Kinsey

Inhibition and experimentation with a loving partner was one thing, but if you didn’t feel like indulging in sado-masochism, husband/wife-swapping, pederasty, fetishism, gay sex and orgies then of course there was clearly something wrong with your newly liberated self. After all, half of America was at it, shouldn’t you be too? The man and woman in a loving heterosexual relationship were wondering whether such normality was actually pedestrian.

Perhaps the standard sexual expression of the male-female and loving intimacy was passé?

Following the publishing of the Kinsey reports came in a veritable flood of old and new literature to imbibe the sexual revolution with suitable largesse – or guilty perversity, depending on your focus. As we have seen, the psychiatrist Hervey M. Cleckley goes into a lengthy discussion in Caricature of Love on the nature of the intelligentsia’s art –  including literature – which had a profound effect on the sexual consciousness of pre and post-war America and Europe. He included examples from Baudelaire, Huysmans, Strindberg, Whitman, Wilde, Swinburne, de Sade, Swift, Gide, and others, finding a remarkable common theme of antipathy towards women at best, and downright loathing and derision at worst. In fact, all authors exhibited pathologies of the perverse and delighted in an overt or passive aggressive narrative toward the feminine, the advocacy of sexual deviancy in general and the denigrating of normal sexual relations between a man and a woman.  (We might say that “normal” here, is where an affectionate and/or loving relationship exists with some form of commitment to each other. Mechanical sex as an end in itself is not the primary motivator).

Again, this is not about prudish aversion to different forms of sexual expression but the intent behind the sexual revolution that was set in motion.

Cleckley cited a number of books that took hold of the public’s newly acquired curiosities immediately after the bombshell of Kinsey’s findings. One of these books he listed was The Ethics of Sexual Acts (1934) by Kinsey’s friend author and occultist Rene Guyon and very pertinent to the mind-set under discussion. In the introduction to the book a doctor breathlessly presents the man as a sex philosopher and an expert in matters of passion, eroticism and sexual freedom serving as a welcome antidote to the anti-sexual puritanism. For this gentleman, the “science” of the Kinsey reports confirmed the doctor’s view that Guyon was a sexual visionary of the highest order.

For instance, he writes:

“… it is amazing how frequently Kinsey’s cold objective figures bear witness to the truth of Guyon’s assertions and tend to support his ideas, which at times may seem extreme.”

The same physician informs us:

“…that Neither Guyon nor Kinsey can find justification for the terms “normality” or “abnormality” in the sexual life of man.”

He also warns us:

Both Guyon’s and Kinsey’s books are high explosives. They are likely to blow sky-high many of our most sacred notions. What arguments can the anti-sexualists and professional moral-izers—forever on the warpath against men like Guyon—advance against Kinsey’s figures and charts? …

Faced by Guyon’s disconcerting candor (and also by Kinsey’s unimpeachable figures) even the liberal-minded scientist, believing himself quite free of prejudices, may suddenly discover that he too has retained childhood inhibitions and that his reasoning is impaired by some deeply embedded, ecclesiastical taboos and subconscious repressions. [9]

Rene GUYONCleckly reminds us that this individual was clearly elated with the antidote to all that repression that he believed Guyon and Kinsey were offering, as whole generations were. In part, of course, this was true. In the introduction refers to Kinsey as standing: “… closely behind Guyon, ready to back up this early crusader with science,” which is false. What this really meant was an exclusively mechanistic, Darwinian and Freudian theory of sexuality, heavily influenced by sex magick and paedophilia.

What the Kinsey report sowed in the mass consciousness and sexual identity was more than just the permission to indulge in sexual acts that could become as extreme as one liked. It was more than seeing the instincts as caged tigers to be let loose in pretty much in any way that men and women felt inclined, to be exacted on anyone who fitted the bill of one’s sexual desires, it was the imposition of a perception of sexuality as a mechanistic function devoid of higher possibilities and thus an open door to pathology. Now, the only limits on the proffered banquet of sexual acts is the landscape of our imagination overflowing with instinctual hunger and valueless desire but isolated from any hope of true intimacy.

Cleckley continues:

“By this theory the author repeatedly ‘proves’ that any and all means by which ejaculation can be attained are equally ‘natural’ ‘A sexual object,’ he announces, ‘is not essential or indispensable for the full satisfaction of the sexual sense. For this purpose, any one mechanical process may be as good as any other, whether this process involves the use of an object or not.’ […]

This being so, if the anal, oral and sexual mucous membranes are all equally suited to play their part in the mechanical process, they are all of equal value, and it is no more necessary to delimit these specific zones than to compare their relative efficacy …

In reality, all this amounts to nothing more than that the anal and oral zones behave like the genital zone …This behavior derives its value from the fact that the cavities in question have all more or less the same form; but we know very well that in onanism the prehensile members [hands] show themselves quite capable of creating an artificial cavity which serves the same mechanical purpose.” [10]

Cleckley highlights the theme of this “mechanistic theory of sexuality,” revealing that just as Kinsey believes “The only unnatural sex act is that which you cannot perform” so Guyon attempts to prove the same, where exhibitionism, incest, paedophilia, pederasty, necrophilia, and coprophilia “are healthy and equally satisfactory expressions of biologic impulse, entirely normal and commendable.” [11] 

If the object of desire is a sentient being with consciousness rather than just a screw in a machine; (no pun intended) – a set of orifices that must be penetrated – then there is always a chance for the connection to responsibility, values, ethics, empathy, and the deeper potential of love to come into play. But this is not the case. In normalising the pathology listed above it places the mechanical, chemical dominator of instinct squarely in the human consciousness as the destroyer of principles and limits. Narcissistic sex for sex’s sake is to be not only natural, but hip and cool; the forerunner of “free love” and a free society. Is that really what the new flares of psychedelic and sexual freedom were about? Was it free love – or just a free for all? Healing our sexual selves by releasing repression in the Freudian tradition seems to have spilled over into something entirely different.

Guyon, after encouraging the enlisting of prostitutes to pad out the numbers for a good old fashioned orgies states: “It goes without saying also that its justifiability is never called into question by those who have rebelled against repression and have deliberately rejected it from their system of sexual ethics.” In other words, the system sexual ethics actually involves the absence of any ethics at all. Anything goes and you need not be concerned about consequences or the deeper substratum of the human being. Which goes surprisingly close to the idea of “Do what thou wilt,” the maxim of which forms the lynchpin of a particular Satanic occult practice we will look at presently.

tumblr_n7qhr6Ulo71sfie3io1_1280

The Freudian, Kinsey-Guyon view of sexuality

tumblr_nhrpkdBfkR1sfie3io1_1280(public domain: New Old Stock)

Those who see such free-spirited emancipation as something other than freedom of the body and mind are accused of prejudice, anti-sexuality and retrogression. While the prudish and puritanical are also part of the problem, the issue here is of psycho-subversion by pathological constructs paraded as sexual emancipation. Or, as Cleckley explains, Guyon sees: “…The psychology of these extraordinary acts [which] can be explained as a simple manifestation of preference, and cannot be looked upon as “morbid,” since it has a perfectly natural source…” where: “… all methods are equally normal.”

Now place this worldview in the context of how one views women as literal objects to penetrate and domesticate and man as nothing more than alpha-pistons re-fuelling their engines of desire to conquer and consume. What this perception increases is the idea of a world of consumption, without sexual limits, sex for its own sake and the erosion of values that surround the hope of loving, more cohesive and strengthened relations. Moral distinctions and thus values between communities and society play no part where sensation and the orgasm is the defining factor of liberation. It is a road map for a psychopath’s view of sex, as Cleckley reiterates:

Every mechanical means of producing sexual pleasure is normal and legitimate; there is no room for moral distinctions between the various available methods; all are equally justifiable and equally suited to their particular ends…The personal characteristics of the sexual partner have nothing to do with the physiological manifestations of sexual pleasure itself; the importance attributed to these characteristics is a matter of convention…. […] …the ‘sexual pervert’ has no real existence, nor any proper place in the nomenclature of disease . . . these are not pathological cases; they are, on the contrary, people who have remained in much closer touch with nature, truth and health than those who, willing or otherwise, have succumbed to repression. [12]

These books and others like them, set out to explore sexuality not always in favour of true freedom but to redefine sexual taste and change the normal person’s incentive which is naturally lacking towards what can be safely defined as pathology. Such strains of literary psychopathy infiltrating and warping cultural mores is defined by Łobaczewski as both essential psychopathy and in the case of some of the more literary classics: “asthenic psychopathy”: “This type of person finds it easier to adjust to social life. The lesser cases in particular adapt to the demands of the society of normal people, taking advantage of its understanding for the arts and other areas with similar traditions. Their literary creativity is often disturbing if conceived in ideational categories alone; they insinuate to their readers that their world of concepts and experiences is self- evident; also it contains characteristic deformities.” [13]

Thus, as part of a larger method of social engineering by psychopathological influences, this helps to contour such “tastes” towards their singular preferences – starting in childhood.

We are now in the early part of the 21st century, where we will be able to gauge how successful this direction has been.

 


Notes

[1] ‘US government gives free Viagra to paedophiles’ Times Online, By James Bone, May 23, 2005.
[2] Methods, Sex and Madness by Julia O’Connell Davidson and Derek Layder. Published by Routledge 1994, this edition 2001. ISBN 0415-09764-9.  See Chapter 4 The Survey Method p.83.
[3] Bancroft, J. (2004). Alfred C. Kinsey and the Politics of Sex Research. Annual Review of Sex Research, 15, 1-39.
[4]Kinsey, A. (1998). Sexual Behavior in the Human Male. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
[5] ‘Kinsey’s Crimes Against Children’ By Robert Stacy McCain, Washington Post, May 1999.
[6] For further reading on the Rockfeller dynasty’s relationship to Nazi eugenics and research in psychology read: ‘Rockefeller, Nazis, The UN, & Genocide’ by Anton Chaitkin educate-yourself.org and Nazi Nexus: America’s Corporate Connections to Hitler’s Holocaust by Edwin Black. Published by Dialog Press; First Edition edition, 2009. ISBN-10: 0914153099 / War Against the Weak: Eugenics and America’s Campaign to Create a Master Race by Edwin Black Published by Dialog Press, 2008. ISBN-10: 0914153056.
[7] p. 201; Kinsey, Crimes & Consequences: The Red Queen and the Grand Scheme Third Edition, Judith A. Reisman, Published by IInst. Media Education, 2003 | ISBN-10: 0966662415
[8] Ibid. Reisman (pp. 170-171)
[9] op. cit. Cleckley (pp.182-183)
[10] Ibid. (pp.183-184)
[11] Ibid. (p.184)
[12] Ibid. (p.187)
[13] op. cit. Lobaczewski, (p.94 )

Feminism or Infiltration? III: Libido of the Ugly

1973951Feminism, if not infiltrated has without doubt become infected by the same strains of pathology as any other ideology or belief that has the seeds of truth within it and thus a threat to the Pathocracy. Nowhere is this more evident than in its response to the many dissenters of the new feminism that was riding the wave of acceptance in the early seventies.

One antidote which provided plenty of vitriolic critique came from Argentine-German Esther Vilar whose book: The Manipulated Man made plenty of fresh-faced feminists even more apoplectic with rage and shock. Rather than white, middle-class women being the object of oppression and exploitation Vilar claims that the reverse is true – it is women who employ a sophisticated mixture of emotional manipulation, blackmail and psycho-strategy to gain the upper hand in a relationship of which most men are not aware. Some of the strategies she believes women use include luring men with sex and specific seduction strategies; using praise to control men administered at optimal moments for maximum effect and the use of love and romance to mask real intentions.

Though it might seem obvious now, it was heretical stuff and mightily controversial at the time. As regards men in contemporary society, Vilar listed some of the disadvantages she saw for men compared to women:

  • Men are conscripted; women are not.
  • Men are sent to fight in wars; women are not.
  • Men retire later than women (even though, due to their lower life-expectancy, they should have the right to retire earlier).
  • Men have almost no influence over their reproduction (for males, there is neither a pill nor abortion — they can only get the children women want them to have).
  • Men support women; women never, or only temporarily, support men.
  • Men work all their lives; women work only temporarily or not at all.
  • Even though men work all their lives, and women work only temporarily or not at all, on average, men are poorer than women.
  • Men only “borrow” their children; women can keep them (as men work all their lives and women do not, men are automatically robbed of their children in cases of separation — with the reasoning that they have to work). [1]

Vilar’s book certainly caused a veritable storm of indignant protest in its day, mostly from feminists. Admittedly, even by today’s standards decrying all women as essentially “bitches” and “stupid” is as extreme as generalising that all men are chauvinist thugs. This serves only to polarise gender issues rather than offer progressive understanding. It is an extreme book by anyone’s standards, not least the reaction it caused including death threats and the most abject vitriol that understandably took Vilar by surprise. However, not only did the book provide a counterpoint to the unassailable feminist movement as a whole, it also acted as a mirror for narcissistic feminists and their unfortunate trajectory.  It certainly got people talking and allowing more moderate versions of Vilar’s critique to emerge.

Regardless of the psychological reasons for writing such a work, in her 1998 preface to the new edition she stated:

As absurd as it may sound, today’s men need feminism much more than their wives do. Feminists are the last ones who still describe men the way they like to see themselves: as egocentric, power-obsessed, ruthless and without inhibitions when it comes to satisfying their instincts. Therefore the most aggressive Women’s Libbers find themselves in the strange predicament of doing more to maintain the status quo than anyone else. Without arrogant accusations, the macho man would no longer exist, except perhaps in the movies. If the press stylise men as rapacious wolves, the actual sacrificial lambs of this ‘men’s society’, men themselves, would no longer flock to the factories so obediently.

So I hadn’t imagined broadly enough the isolation I would find myself in after writing this book. Nor had I envisaged the consequences which it would have for subsequent writing and even for my private life — violent threats have not ceased to this date. A woman who defended the arch-enemy — who didn’t equate domestic life with solitary confinement and who described the company of young children as a pleasure, not a burden — necessarily had to become a ‘misogynist’, even a ‘reactionary’ and ‘fascist’ in the eyes of the public.[2] [Emphasis mine]

Though conveniently brushing aside her tendency to reduce issues down to simplistic, hackneyed white-washing she nevertheless raises important points in the above. Is a woman allowed to be all the things that feminism seems to squash? Or have we indeed arrived at a strange point where much of feminism in the modern Western world is unyielding to the point that it has indeed become another belief without the ability to evolve? It certainly seems that way.

Though economic shifts have played an enormous part in twisting the gender roles, of far more importance is the effects of an anti-human world on our core selves. In post-modern societies of cynical materialism and fake spirituality everything is filtered through this narcissistic façade where the perfection of the body is sought for and according to the whims of advertising, fashion and the stale clichés of male and female stereotypes. The effects of this on women are processed differently.

Studies show that emotional intelligence or a social cognition is higher in women with logical/mathematical intelligence and IQ tests persistently higher for men. [3] Does that mean women are more stupid? Absolutely not. Knee-jerk reactions from academics and media commentators feed into preconceived definitions of what it means to be male and female, each grinding their respective axes on the wet-stones of their own visions of emancipation.

In the same way, recent studies have confirmed the obvious assertions (obvious accept to the financiers of this research) that when either sex shows more flesh they are considered less intelligent. Once again, for both sexes it is the body and the mind as separate entities just like the functioning of male and female that promotes erroneous conclusions:

The new research suggests we see others as having two aspects of the mind – called agency and experience. Agency is the capacity to act, plan and exert self-control, while experience is the capacity to feel pain, pleasure and emotions. Interestingly, the amount of skin shown can determine if we see another as one of ‘experience’ or ‘agency’. During the study, men and women who focused on the body regarded that person as ‘experience’ with little capacity to plan and act. Professor Gray suggested this was because people automatically think of minds and bodies as separate things, even opposites. The capacity to act is more often tied to the ‘mind’ while experience is linked to the body.”[4]

Could it have anything to do with the strictly rationalist and reductionist brand of science still holding sway in the halls of academia? [5]

The above findings says much about our conditioned learning that sees mind and body as separate rather than a holistic system. This also explains why both sexes are trapped in their respective mirrors.  If showing more skin immediately equates women with the “experiencer” label and man with “agency” this not only confirms how disconnected we have become from our natural bodily state but a culture that glorifies commodity and quantity over quality and substance. It is little wonder that women will be placed in the “bimbo” with “little capacity to plan and act” while feeling “pain pleasure and emotions,” and thus “sexually available”. Conversely, men will automatically confirm the sporty, alpha male as well as being sexually available rather than the sensitive, “touchy-feely” type.

With the onset of largely iconic gay influences which have helped to encourage the uniform brand of gym-bodies in the last several years, this describes the upward curve of narcissism and vanity rather than health and fitness based on useful service to others. More gender clichés are served up for consumption from a technophilic society keen to keep it that way.

If women are suffering inside from a battery of historical and feminist led modern influences then men’s role as an emotionless robot with pectorals bigger than his porn-rag fantasy and the excess feminisation that produces the little boy syndrome unable to do anything but watch TV and play video games is directly related. But both sexes have been responsible for its continued fixation as they try on new ways of viewing their relative positions without awareness of natural predispositions.

For instance, women’s beauty is both a complex mix of power and pariah. Naomi Wolf illustrates on the one hand, the relentless push to find love and appreciation from readily available masks which women have donned as much for competition with other females as the goal of material acquisition which drives some men’s ambition. She explains:

Whatever is deeply, essentially female — the life in a woman’s expression, the feel of her flesh, the shape of her breasts, the transformations after childbirth of her skin–is being reclassified as ugly, and ugliness as disease. […]  At least a third of a woman’s life is marked with aging; about a third of her body is made of fat. Both symbols are being transformed into operable condition–so that women will only feel healthy if we are two thirds of the women we could be. How can an ‘ideal’ be about women if it is defined as how much of a female sexual characteristic does not exist on the woman’s body, and how much of a female life does not show on her face?” [6]

When men respond to the facade it often acts as a mirror of his narrowing values and lack of authenticity. Or in the words of H.L. Mencken, he has been directed to worship “the libido for the ugly” and take this as reality. Wolf comments: “What becomes of a man who acquires a beautiful woman, with her “beauty” his sole target? He sabotages himself. He has gained no friend, no ally, no mutual trust: She knows quite well why she has been chosen. He has succeeded in buying something: the esteem of other men who find such an acquisition impressive.”

Despite Wolf’s assertions in her writings that this is all about men oppressing women the truth is somewhat more complex which should become evident as we continue. And let’s not pretend that women do not do exactly the same by setting the “trap” for such mutually satisfactory contracts while claiming innocence. Nonetheless, it is little wonder that women are still seen as sexual objects when relationships at both ends of the spectrum are determined by sex as “fast food” trail-blazed by the mainstreaming of pornography and online dating.

Again, do women really want to be “equal” when that equality is dysfunctional at the outset?

Wolf reverses the male objectification:

Women could probably be trained quite easily to see men first as sexual things. If girls never experienced sexual violence; if a girl’s only window on male sexuality were a stream of easily available, well-lit, cheap images of boys slightly older than herself, in their late teens, smiling encouragingly and revealing cuddly erect penises the color of roses or mocha, she might well look at, masturbate to, and, as an adult, “need” beauty pornography based on the bodies of men. And if those initiating penises were represented to the girl as pneumatically erectible, swerving neither left nor right, tasting of cinnamon or forest berries, innocent of random hairs, and ever ready; if they were presented alongside their measurements, length, and circumference to the quarter inch; if they seemed to be available to her with no troublesome personality attached; if her sweet pleasure seemed to be the only reason for them to exist–then a real young man would probably approach the young woman’s bed with, to say the least, a failing heart.” [7]

And such a “training” for the young woman has already been taking place for many years. “Failing hearts” are occurring in both men and women though expressed differently.  Sure, the above sexual objectification occurs on a daily basis. But  let’s not forget the same toxic effects from the narcissistic arsenal of damaged women who objectify men through manipulation and dangerous emotional games which have nothing to do with appearance but everything to do with a deeper imperative, whether it be the biological urge for birthing or the need to have emotional control., the effects of which can be highly toxic in both marriage and partnership. But because the “fairer sex” are historically “oppressed” then it cannot be possible that covert forms of female induced oppression against the male exist…

What remains true is that our identity – whether we are gay, lesbian, straight, bi or transgender – is under attack from social engineering where movements become progressively hollowed out by pathological individuals who corrupt the purity of intent and replace it with a counterfeit version – a form of psycho-subversion, if you will.  It is truly a “group-think” which derives its energy from an Orwellian “double think” where paramoralisms and paralogic reign supreme.  (You’ll see why if you keep up to date with future series).

Feminism isn’t the only one.

MAN-AND-WOMAN_2-1024x656

TAMARA KVESITADZE: opening ceremony of statue |‘Man and Woman’ on October 30th, 2010 in Batumi, Georgia (Effigies)


Women in the West have finally clawed back many of their rights to find that they are ironically mirroring the male who was already a victim of an economic and social contract drawn up by those who cannot be considered in anyway “normal”.  When you fight for the right not to be objectified, to have a place in politics or to be treated as an intellectual equal – this is right and proper. But such a wish has gone much further so that the same quality of injustices are visited upon the male the recognition of which is largely swept away by a form of narcissism masked by largely white, Western feminism.  Whether in the family courts or the toxic effects of feminist belief within relationships, this is not going anywhere good for either sex.

We are spiritually and psychologically compromised in ways we are only just beginning to fathom. And feminists are in danger of fighting for the right to be exploited at a higher rung of the ladder that actually leads nowhere.

Whatever has been “deeply, essentially female” and male is in danger of being comprehensively discarded by the feminism of the 21st century.  A new way to perceive ourselves and the material world is desperately needed.  It is not the lack of material power, freedom in the work place or the red herring of gender equality but the toxic effects of a body-centrism that claims both male and female – the objectifying of the female form and women’s embrace of such a caricature and the disempowerment of both gender roles. This may be one reason that women’s narcissism is through the roof whilst the recognition of the female paedophile, child abuser, pathological narcissist and psychopath are only just managing to break through the cultural bias so that deep research can take place.

A recent report distinct for its large demographic analysis confirmed the emergence of women “reclaiming their power”  both in the market place and in relationships. The objective of the project was to: “… find out how close, intimate relationships vary over a lifetime.” The results of the study which were published by Professor Robin Dunbar of Oxford University, UK in the Journal of Scientific Reports came from the analysis of the texts of mobile phone calls of three million people incorporating the age and sex of callers providing a very “big picture” of people’s lives.  It gave overwhelming evidence that “romantic relationships are driven by women” based on “pair-bonding” proving that this is much more important to women than men. From the data as a whole, researchers determine that: “…a woman’s social world is intensely focussed on one individual and will shift as a result of reproductive interests from being the mate to children and grandchildren.” [8] 

The project also wanted to “…find out how the gender preference of best friends, as defined by the frequency of the calling, changed over the course of a lifetime and differed between men and women.” Professor Dunbar’s team reported that: “… women start to switch the preference of their best friend from about the mid-30s, and by the age of 45 a woman of a generation younger becomes the ‘new best friend.’ Men tended to choose a woman (a girlfriend or wife) as a best friend much later in life and for a shorter time.

“Women, however, choose a man of a similar age to be their best friend from the age of 20. He remains for about 15 years, after which time he’s replaced by a daughter.” At the beginning of a relationship women call their spouse more than any other person, but as their daughters become old enough to have children, the focus is transferred and they become the centre of the woman’s life.  In the words of Professor Dunbar: “…at root the important relationships are those between women and not those between men.” [9]

Let’s re-visit Esther Vilar’s somewhat wild musings on this issue back in 1971:

… only women exist in a woman’s world. The women she meets at church, at parent-teacher meetings, or in the supermarket; the women with whom she chats over the garden fence; the women at parties or window-shopping in the more fashionable streets; those she apparently never seems to notice – these women are the measure of her success or failure. Women’s standards correspond to those in other women’s heads, not to those in the heads of men; it is their judgment that really counts, not that of men. A simple word of praise from another woman – and all those clumsy, inadequate male compliments fall by the wayside, for they are just praises out of the mouths of amateurs. Men really have no idea in what kind of world women live in; their hymns of praise miss all the vital points. [10]

This extract at least, is not quite as extreme when there is some statistical and socio-biological data to back it up.  Professor Dunbar believes this proves that we are returning to a more matriarchal based society. However, if under psychopathological dominance it is unlikely to resemble the kind of “equality” that human society yearns for.

With this in mind, could the real shift that ripped the sexual and emotional inheritance from our daily lives have buried a truth that there was something sacred and mutually empowering in the sexual act and by extension, the relationships between men and women – and other sexual orientations?

Eisler and many others believe so:

The search for this lost wisdom by mystics – and by women and men throughout the ages – is the search for reconnection with our partnership roots. It is the search for a way of relating that is the antithesis of the dominator mode, where in both reality and myth polarization and strife, conflict and separation, winning and losing, dominating and subduing, dismembering and disembodying, conquering and controlling, in short, force, fear, and violent disconnection, are the central themes. And its very essence, as mystical writings have so often brought out, is the search for a means of healing what was so brutally rent asunder with the shift to a dominator world: the fundamental erotic, and with this also spiritual, connection between women and men. [11]

Perhaps the only thing that will change the fortunes of both sexes is the recognition that male and female understanding lies beyond the terminal dance within the society’s economic, corporate and political framework. The success of one gender over another in order to retain the same consequences of mass pathology perpetrated by high level psychopaths and stepped down to endemic narcissism, must be seen for what it is if we are to free ourselves from a perception that men and women are constantly equated with inferiority or superiority – my rights as opposed to your rights. Perhaps we need to obtain a big picture view of the forces that shape us, otherwise, all the wonderful creative ideas that lie within so many great minds will prove to be still-born, yet again. That necessarily means an equally radical shift in perception that saw the division between the sexes all those years ago, so that a bridge may once again be formed.

The devaluation of women is a disaster for men. The devaluation of men is a disaster for women. Our misplaced anger and its projection into the external world are too easily channelled into causes and beliefs that temporarily mollify but ultimately benefit no one. The psychological knowledge of the psychopathic trickster that exists to create division between the two must form part of our collective education for young and old. Until we begin to see the culprit is the institutional and ceremonial psychopath – the embodiment of natural evil – that loves to create ideologies to divide and rule, then the true roles of men and women – heterosexual and homosexual – will continue to be obscured and pathologised.

In the next post we’ll have a look at some of the causes and effects of our present confusions in order to observe what we may call the “Sex Establishment” and how it not only benefits from such gender divisions, but has grown to distort and subvert the very concept of sex and sexuality.

 


Notes

[1] The Manipulated Man by Esther Vilar Published by Abelard-Schuman 1972 | ISBN-10: 0200718754
[2] Ibid.
[3] ‘Men cleverer than women’ claim BBC News, August 25, 2005.
[4] ‘Cover up to look smart: Men and women who bare more flesh are regarded as less intelligent, study finds’ By Lauren Paxman, The Daily Mail, Femail, 11 November, 2011.
[5] For more on this do read The Science Delusion by Rupert Sheldrake.
[6] p.232; The Beauty Myth: How Images of Beauty Are Used Against Women by Naomi Wolf. Published by Harper Perennial, 1992 Reprint: 2002 | ISBN-10: 0060512180.
[7] Ibid (p.154)
[8] ‘Phone data shows romance ‘driven by women’ BBC News, April 2012.
[9] Ibid.
[10] op. cit. Vilar.
[11]
Eisler, Riane; Sacred Pleasure: Sex, Myth, and the Politics of the Body, Published by Harper Collins, 2012.

Feminisim or Infiltration? II: “… Like a Fish Needs a Bicycle,”

“Although feminism speaks the language of liberation, self-fulfillment, options, and the removal of barriers, these phrases invariably mean their opposites and disguise an agenda at variance with the ideals of a free society.”

Michael Levin, Professor of Philosophy, City of New York University


In the context of an Official Culture steeped in narcissism, feminism has not been excluded from its influence.

The originators of radical feminism were largely lesbian, seeking active polarisation of men and women rather than integration of values and common ground. Radical feminists believe that men are not relevant to a new society, women being the superior sex, amounting to a form of matriarchal fascism. Some believe that radical feminism and its subtle undercurrent in standard feminism is in fact an outlet and cover for misandry and not created as a natural response to the oppression women have suffered historically. Many of those who call themselves “Third Wave” feminists think of the concept of men’s rights as a personal slight against centuries of feminine oppression:

How could that possibly be credible since we have suffered so much and suffer still ?

How could the feminist movement possibly be making matters worse?

And this is to misunderstand the nature of our social systems which have engineered men and women to be products of its most toxic effects, spiritually and psychologically. Ponerological influences will distort and subvert the purest of movements until we recognise what is really going on. Unfortunately psycho-spiritual corruption of this kind leaves no movement or belief untouched.

The history of subverting positive movements for change is a tried and tested one from intelligence agencies, the 20th Century version of which started back in the 1950s with the rise of political dissidents, most notably within ethnic minority, peace, and civil liberty movements. There is also substantial evidence that such operations are now firmly entrenched within the New Age or human potential movement; within ecology and green politics as well as anti-globalisation activism. This has been especially effective in the U.S. Far from closing down in the 1970s these covert operations have continued apace, and have been taken to new levels of obfuscation and deception in line with the public’s growing awareness and Information Age. But each movement is different. Whereas in some cases it is tasked with creating lies and disinformation and to funnel awareness into intellectual and spiritual cul-de-sacs, in others, it is to stimulate conditions by which certain movements will implode from within taking the positive aspects of the seed idea with it. In the case of feminism and the gay pride movement it has been to promote radicalism and thus subvert the underlying message and thus increase the divide and therefore the emotional and instinctive capital available for the Establishment.

bicycle

The hugely influential feminist writer and activist Gloria Steinham responsible for planting the misanthropic seed embodied in the maxim: “women need men like a fish needs a bicycle,” was, in all probability a paid CIA asset throughout the 1960s and 70s tasked with routing student communists and then promoting radical feminism.[1] The founder of Ms. Magazine an influential feminist rag, Steinham managed to have this funded by indirectly through the CIA and the Rockefeller foundation, the latter of which seems to crop up whenever a branch of social engineering needs some financial support. This makes the assumption that modern US feminism was also a grassroots, natural reaction to men’s oppression rather insubstantial.

What we are seeing in both the US and UK is a strange reversal of gender roles. This does not mean that men are becoming nannies and women racing drivers, rather the emotional fabric of the sexes is undergoing a loss of identity where biological roles that go very deep are being discarded for the wrong reasons. If a woman wants to stay at home and take on the role of housewife – a desperately important role and job in the family unit – she is made to feel as though she is acquiescing to male domination. Yet, this is increasingly not an option anyway. Most women have no choice but to enter the corporate world due to the nature of our increasingly fragile economies. Naomi Wolf stated: “For almost 40 years, that era’s Western feminist critique of rigid sex-role stereotyping has prevailed. In many ways, it has eroded or even eliminated the kind of arbitrary constraints that turned peaceable boys into aggressive men and stuck ambitious girls in low-paying jobs.” [2] While wanting more equality in the workplace, the right to have children while discarding the very real differences between men and women it seems to suggest that a serious revision is in order as to what kind of feminism operates in our Western societies and whether we need that “-ism” at all.

A recent UK study found that “… over 60 percent of young men aged between 18 and 29 are competent ironers, with only 10 percent able to maintain a car and almost half can’t even change a tyre. Three quarters regularly don an apron in the kitchen and almost 80 percent take on housework. Young men are so in touch with their emotions [that] a whopping 85 percent are comfortable crying in front of others.” [3] Most importantly however: “…They are also more obsessed with themselves than any other generation, with two thirds of them striving to attain a perfectly toned body.” This is far from satisfactory for “…women aged 18 to 29 [who] complained that men are not masculine enough with 60 percent saying they’d prefer a man to take control in their relationship.” [4] While over in Canada a pattern that is also being reflected in Europe shows: “…that women have outpaced men in education and earnings growth: 22 per cent of husbands have wives whose income now exceeds theirs, compared to 4 per cent in 1970. The rise in women’s earnings corresponds with an upsurge in their education.” The women were quickly dubbed “alpha wives.” [5]

Addressing the male/female socio-economic divide is obviously a positive aspiration. But has being a “liberated woman” actually reduced the choices rather than increased them? Does being free to have as much sex as you want as often as you want liberate? It would be churlish in the extreme to disregard the chains on women’s sexuality and basic freedoms for millennia. We only have to look at the global sex trade, female circumcision and the drug-addled Nigerian prostitutes on my street corner to see that women and the sexual objectification that still surrounds the female is as prevalent as ever. However, in the Western, feminist, middle-class context we are looking at here, something else has happened as a reaction to that sexploitation.

Strategy consultant Susan Walsh made the point succinctly from her blog Hooking up smart: “Apparently in the femosphere, having a lot of casual sex is a way of communicating that you are confident, and sexy, and have no needs – or at least, not any that might be fulfilled by a male. I believe there are less risky ways of getting that message across.” And ultimately more rewarding and fulfilling – which applies to both men and women.

Walsh shares with us the fact that American men, in selecting among 67 desirable traits, ranked sexual faithfulness and loyalty #1. If women are playing out the feminism dream of being independent, non-dependent, strong and free-spirited which is believed to be equated with the male cliché of “sowing his oats” and “hooking up” as a normal strategy then, as Walsh mentions, this is a very poor strategy, for women who seek a long-term relationship, or life partner. And if the bonding chemical exists in much higher quantities in women than men, and women’s brains are also hard-wired to nurture then this is surely setting up some body-mind dissonance at a subconscious level. Usually these denials come home to roost.

Walsh quotes from The Evolution of Desire (Buss, 1994) to back up her claims:

Studies demonstrate that women’s preferences for short-term mates include availability as a marriage partner. They strongly resemble their preferences for a husband: kind, romantic, understanding, exciting, stable, healthy, humorous, and generous with resources. In other words, women have high standards for both short-term and long-term relationships, or at least that’s how we’ve evolved thus far.

Conversely, men select for very different traits when seeking short-term sexual partners. Compared with their long-term preferences, men don’t want casual partners who are prudish, conservative or have a low sex drive. In contrast to standards for committed relationships, for short-term sex they want: sexual experience, including promiscuity, and a high sex drive.” [6]

This means that men have had both sides of their bread buttered in that they have been praised and lauded when notching up conquests from college to office exploits while women have traditionally been seen as “sluts” or femme fatales when doing the same. And now, thanks to pathological influences from on high, these ratios have become more extreme.

But if men’s natural preference is for women who are faithful and loyal – and women should expect the same from men – then it behooves feminists to understand that doing what men do under largely misguided values is not necessarily true freedom or biologically healthy, given what we know about gender differences. Nor will it increase the likelihood of a stable male-female relationship in the future. Promiscuity is unfortunately a male throwback that is stacked against the female doing the same. Men cannot give birth, after all.  Biological differences are inescapable even at a more subtle level. Walsh observes for the male:

“A woman’s sexual history serves as a proxy, or indicator of future behavior. It is not perfect, but men can and do make use of this information when selecting partners. This does not mean that a promiscuous woman cannot find a mate, but it does mean that the pool of men from which she may select has shrunk dramatically. A woman may say, ‘I would never want a guy who felt that way,’ and that’s perfectly legitimate. Still, it’s important that she understand the effectiveness of various sexual strategies in mating so that she may make informed decisions.” [7]

At the beginning of the 21st Century has feminism misinformed and confused rather than offer true liberation where it counts? Does becoming more like the corporate alpha male augment and value the feminine principle of nurturing, cooperation and bonding? When much of our culture is a product of narcissism and psychopathy, it is highly doubtful. Once again, feminism is just as vulnerable to ponerological influences as any other “-ism.” Therefore, there’s a reason why some women no longer see feminism as positive as they can already see that is has been co-opted and  absorbed into the Divide and Rule dichotomy so favoured by the Establishment class.

Gustav_Klimt_kiss

“The Kiss” by Gustav Klimt (1907-1908) (wikipedia)

As journalist Lisa Guiliani passionately explains from a recent article on the same, not all women are feminists and that does not mean they are unthinking or uncaring but often have a more universalist view, where both sexes are seen as victims of the Establishment system:

The Feminist Movement only represents women who THINK LIKE THE Movement. It does NOT represent ALL women. Let’s see how many feminists support my right to express ideas that run counter to their group think. Because they sure as hell don’t represent women who think like me. I am no bible-thumping christian, and I am no deluded false political paradigm swigging ‘Democrat or Republican’. The Feminist Movement does NOT support or represent women who CHALLENGE its group think or its agenda. I am just a woman.

I do not hate men, in spite of and despite any of the bad experiences I’ve had with men or because of the bad men I’ve been involved with, or because of my bad choices and poor decisions overall. And I am a mother, who has seen the negative effects of joining the workforce in my own life – and the irreparable toll it took upon my family over the years. I see what a lot of these feminist ideas have wrought upon the world, and how they’ve flipped this country inside out and upside down.

I don’t think the trade-off was worth it. What have we really gained? More self-respect? More worthless money? A ‘right’ to a bogus vote? More meaningful relationships with the opposite sex? A surefire way to get rid of unwanted pregnancy even as we continue having more irresponsible sex? Wow. So many ‘choices’. How impressive.

Men are so leery of women now, it’s a wonder anyone tries to date us at all. But that’s okay, right? We don’t NEED to date men anymore. We can date each other. Terrific. And while that appeals to a lot of women these days, it does NOT appeal to me. So I’m left to navigate the screwed-up dating world, full of messed up, broken people who present themselves as shiny, happy, successful, shallow, perfect and plastic. [8]


“I consider myself 100 percent a feminist, at odds with the feminist establishment in America. For me the great mission of feminism is to seek the full political and legal equality of women with men. However, I disagree with many of my fellow feminists as an equal opportunity feminist, who believes that feminism should only be interested in equal rights before the law. I utterly oppose special protection for women where I think that a lot of the feminist establishment has drifted in the last 20 years.”

Camille Paglia, American academic and social critic


mother and child

Mother and Child bronze at http://www.e-hood-a-art.com

The sweeping changes that were brought about by the so-called Sexual Revolution fuelled by the counter culture trappings of psychedelia, LSD and the Kinsey Report suggest that the end result was not at all what the original proponents of free love and equality ever expected. Free love or self-indulgence? Sexual freedom or cheap sex?  This is not to say that every aspect of this revolution was bad – not by a long way – but it seems the pendulum has swung back towards its worst aspects and become stuck. This social force has engrained them into present day consciousness as the only way to be; where mutual love and respect of the sexes “… has given us the trashy ‘pornogrification’ of our society.” [9]

If women were “… conned into abandoning self-respect” then men were duped into thinking that such easily “accessible goods” were worth having. In the end, meaningless sex – like the mediocrity of Official Culture on which it derives its sustenance, morphs into a meaningless life. And that is coincidentally, the spiritual malaise most noticeable in 21st century Western society as journalist Bel Mooney eloquently laments:

Health Centre handed out the Pill like sweeties. So you wouldn’t get pregnant – good. But at the same time you had no reason to be careful – bad. Most of us embraced the hippie-esque idea that sexual freedom was a beautiful thing to be celebrated. ‘Seize the day,’ we shouted, and threw old notions like fidelity out of the window. But beneath all those naive and high-sounding ideals, the sexism of supposedly radical and free-thinking men on the left could be summed up with: ‘A woman’s place is underneath.’

As the writer and feminist pioneer Rosie Boycott has said: ‘What was insidious about the underground was that it pretended to be alternative. But it wasn’t providing an alternative for women. It was providing an alternative for men in that there were no problems about screwing around.’

The artist Nicola Lane, another young woman of the age, adds: ‘It was paradise for men – all these willing girls. But the problem with the willing girls was that a lot of the time they were willing not because they particularly fancied the people concerned but because they felt they ought to. There was a lot of misery.’ [10]

For Michael Gurian, the cultural dogma of media stereotypes, though irrefutable is not the main issue. He believes that: “… the foremothers of the ‘70s overemphasized power and go-it-alone independence at the expense of women’s deep need for emotional attachments, including the honorable pursuit of motherhood.” Though much of tradition was deeply flawed so too was feminism in Gurian’s view. He and his wife, family therapist Gail Reid-Gurian suggest a more “logical” and “compromising” approach called “womanism” which advocates “absorbing the best of the past” so that girls’ and women have equal opportunity rights “… but where their yearning for a ‘safe web of intimate relationships’ is recognised and valued.

This of course, extends both ways.

Womanism grew out of the response from black women to racial and gender oppression and has since been taken on by many women in general as an alternative to feminism. Yet, the key difference is what Gurian thinks is the “sacred” nature of motherhood and the symbiosis of male and female potential.

He states:

“… human females and males need to form intimate, long-lasting and symbiotic relationships in order to feel safe and personally fulfilled and in order to raise the next generation safely” […] “Women who never have children are still mothers,”… “They mother communities, other people’s children, the earth itself.” […] Mothering, with a capital M, is the primary goal of girls. I mean by that, mothering the world. My argument would be that females are wired to mother. Some may never have children, but they’re still wired to mother.” [11]

That conclusion would no doubt get many feminists foaming at the mouth at the sheer audacity of such a statement.

Gurian believes that for “the 10 to 20 percent of girls in crisis – especially girls who are abused, disturbed or systematically disrespected…” feminism presents a conceptual framework that can offer a way through. However, he goes on to state that:  “…it’s not the right model for the majority of girls who are doing well at any given moment.”

He also makes the interesting link between girls, family and by extension, the loss of community that now defines much of contemporary society. Gurian’s view places importance on the female’s drive for attachment that is higher than the male. Consequently, he envisages the provision of a “three-family system” which includes not just biological parents and siblings but a far wider range of an extended family such as mentors, single parents, day-care providers and individuals from church, the local neighbourhood and school.  But these ties must be based on “true bonding” something that could become a strength for women in the correct environment. Without these safeguards and in a society that flows in the opposite direction to true bonding, then that quality becomes inverted, expressing itself as dependency and manipulative strategies to obtain the male.

101_1219© infrakshun

As economic realities encroach further into fragmented communities that were once the norm in the pre-cartel-capitalist West, it may just provide the impetus for not only some collective soul-searching but for the natural tendency for human beings to work together and form stronger communities and where the roles of men and women can naturally honour their biological pre-dispositions without compromising their potential. In a more relaxed and attentive environment without strains of radicalism perhaps a return to what is truly important for individual and community survival may reduce the tendency of narcissistic self-preservation and self-promotion.

To that end, Michael Gurian and Gail Reid-Gurian present a summary of the feminist and new womanist principles:

Feminist position   

  • Our goal as a human race should be gender androgyny.
  • Girls suffer more than boys. Males are more privileged than females.
  • The non-working woman is not financially independent and thus is potentially a victim of men.
  • Masculinity is defective and dangerous. Females must react against it.
  • Marriage is an inherently flawed institution and secondary to the needs of women. Achieving female independence is the hardest work of our civilization.
  • Key words: power and empowerment.

Womanist position

  • Women and men by nature are not the same and do not function in the same way. Human life is passionate and progressive as much because of differences as similarities.
  • Women and men are fellow victims of a fear- and violence-based social system and have different but equally painful wounds.
  • The ideal situation for a woman is one in which she is valued equally for work within and outside of the home.
  • Masculinity is mysterious and we need to understand, clarify, accept and shape it meaningfully rather than fearfully.
  • Marriage is sacred and essential to human progress, especially when a couple is raising children. Achieving stable, healthy attachments is the hardest work of our civilization.
  • Key words: self-knowledge and service. [12]

Among many who provide alternatives to the current male dominated paradigm and the female emulation which is following closely behind, social and cultural historian Riane Eisler’s scholarly classic The Chalice and the Blade and her Cultural Transformation Theory is vital in this context. She proposes a “Dominator model” that includes both Patriarchal and Matriarchal cultures that dominated humanity based on the idea that one gender was inferior to the other. The second model is what Ms. Eisler calls the “Partnership Model,” which is based on the principle of “linking rather than ranking.” [13]

spring woman

“Spring Woman” | © infrakshun

She goes on to explain a social disruption of huge proportions that altered the Western Civilisation’s cultural evolution and natural pathways towards partnership. This was caused by invaders who “ushered in a very different form of social organization,” a warrior race who “worshipped the lethal power of the blade – the power to take rather than give life.” [14]

Perhaps this was essentially a huge rise in the incidence of psychopathy and the dominance and separation it has shaped ever since? She explains the ramifications of this shift:

If we stop and think about it, there are only two basic ways of structuring the relations between the female and male halves of humanity. All societies are patterned on either a dominator model – in which human hierarchies are ultimately backed up by force or the threat of force – or a partnership model, with variations in between.

If we look at the whole span of our cultural evolution from the perspective of cultural transformation theory, we see that the roots of our present global crises go back to the fundamental shift in our prehistory that brought enormous changes not only in social structure but also in technology. This was the shift in emphasis from technologies that sustain and enhance life to the technologies symbolized by the Blade: technologies designed to destroy and dominate. This has been the technological emphasis through most of recorded history. And it is this technological emphasis, rather than technology per se, that today threatens all life on our globe.” [15]

This is directly linked to the loss of biological, emotional and ultimately spiritual understanding in both sexes. Technology is still linked to this dominator / psychopathic model whether it is expressed through drone attacks, smart agri-business or transhumanist pop-culture. Moreover, the sexual and religious bias radiating across the last thousand years has perpetuated a desperate ignorance regarding the female and male dominance cycles that ebbed and flowed in ancient times. Largely male educators and scholars were raised from a background of stern Judeo-Christian bias which has overseen the history of education from elementary to University and beyond, where the source of all evil derives from the sin of Eve who was tempted by the Serpent leading humanity to fall from the Edenic State.

Is it any wonder that women were seen as inferior for so long, and that the emasculation of man is now reflecting that disorientation and loss of sexual and spiritual identity? In this context, feminism is as much a part of the dominator system as the overt patriarchy of the past.

 


Notes

[1] ‘Inside the CIA with Gloria Steinem’By Nancy Borman, Village Voice 1979.
[2] op. cit. Wolf.
[3] ‘British men losing their masculinity’ Metro.co.uk 2010.
[4] Ibid.
[5] ‘Are men being robbed of their masculinity?’ By Zosia Bielski, Globe and Mail Sep. 30, 2010.
[6] ‘The Essential Truth About Female Promiscuity’ by Susan Walsh November 8 2010. http://www.hookingupsmart.com. Walsh quotes from The Evolution of Desire: Strategies of Human Mating by David M. Buss; 1994.
[7] Ibid.
[8] ‘Thoughts on the Feminist Movement – Why I Don’t Clap along’ by Lisa Guiliani, Sott.net, April 1, 2012
[9] ‘My generation created the sexual revolution – and it has been wrecking the lives of women ever since’ By Bel Mooney, The Daily Mail, 2 December 2009.
[10] Ibid.
[11] op. cit. Gurian.
[12] Ibid.
[13] The Chalice and the Blade: Our History, Our Future by Riane Eisler. Published by Mandala Books, 1996.p.xix
[14] Ibid.
[15] Ibid.

Sex, Lies and Society VI: Rewiring and Rewards

“…there is a ‘crisis’ amongst young men, a high number of whom are experiencing a “new form of addiction” to excessive use of pornography and video games.”

– Prof. Philip Zimbardo, The Independent


Following on from a brief look at ponerological influences on sexual minorities it seems the influence of our increasingly narcissistic, body-centric culture alongside the explosion of technology and social networks has had a significant impact on sexual identity, especially on adolescent boys.
Which brings us back to the ubiquity of porn.
Psychologist Marnia Robinson calls the “…plastic effects of sexual behaviours on the brain’s delicate reward circuitry” as vastly underestimated. She writes:

Actual experience, however, suggests that intense stimulation can alter sexual tastes in some brains. Indeed, some of today’s Internet porn users are undergoing unnerving changes in their brains and arousal patterns—a possibility now well explained by many experiments revealing the plasticity of the brain. These changes are difficult to reverse while porn use continues. In short, sexual cues that start out as insubstantial and meaningless as cobwebs can become cables, that is, can lay down brain pathways that are given high priority because they are associated with the intense reward of orgasm. [1]

Researchers from Queen Mary’s School of Biological and Chemical Sciences, and the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm report showed that homosexual behaviour is largely shaped by genetics and random environmental factors (that is, not necessarily societal attitudes, family or parenting) with exposure to certain hormones during foetal development as a key determinant.[2] The studies show that genetic factors are of lesser importance than the early hormonal and individual environmental factors giving further credence to the hypothesis that sexuality is highly malleable and dependent on individual influences. So too, the plasticity of the brain open to change from both external factors and our own perceptions. In terms of sexual orientation what does this imply? Consider this description of present neuroplasticity [3] in the context of pornography:

A sensitive brain can wire up to a new sexual cue with a few intense orgasms. Thereafter, such a brain will respond to that cue (whether with arousal or repulsion) before the brain’s owner is even consciously aware of the cue. In short, the brain’s reward circuitry ignites a powerful reaction before the person’s frontal cortex has a chance to dismiss the cue.

In some brains, classic conditioning proves to be but the top of a slippery slope to more permanent alterations of the reward circuitry. These alterations produce a much higher level of dopamine release in key brain circuits (sensitization). This brain change is often accompanied by an overall decrease in the brain’s pleasure response (desensitization). Together these addiction-related changes drive cravings for increasingly stimulating material. [4]

What does say about the sexual imagery and multi-media content that is currently bombarding largely young males? Can we also infer that exposure to pathologies in early childhood can indeed help to determine – at least in part – the outcome of a child’s sexuality?

When these two factors are combined then we may begin to understand the fascination of agencies and perception mangers like the Rockefellers in shaping societies according to their own bizarre precepts. Yet, it remains difficult to study neuroplasticity, environmental factors, genetic crossovers and their relationship to sexual behaviours because misguided ethics committees will not allow it. [5]  What is more pertinent is the connection between sexual orientation and the re-wiring of the brain’s neural pathways.

rear view of a child using a computer

Gary Wilson, an anatomy and physiology teacher suggests that internet pornography is making male sexuality more plastic, with cyber-porn manufacturing superficial tastes, sometimes unrelated to sexual orientation. In relation to the how the brain works he quotes neuroscientist Norman Doidge who states: “The content of what [patients] found exciting changed as the web sites introduced themes and scripts that altered their brains without their awareness. Because plasticity is competitive, the brain maps for new, exciting images increased at the expense of what had previously attracted them.” [6]

Rather than revealing our deepest, sexual urges and letting our craziest fantasies run wild when surfing for pornographic material perhaps it merely reflects an exponential curve of greater extremes? As Wilson proposes: “Could this be why viewers who would never harm others are viewing violent porn? Why gay porn viewers are feeling baffled by their tastes for straight rape porn or lesbian porn? Why straight men are bewildered by their tastes for transsexual or gay porn?” [7] And as neuroscientist Jim Pfaus points out: “… the mating brain is opportunistic. It’s not strictly bound by intrinsic wiring, but rather it adapts to promising sexual cues.” [8]

And when the statistically highest user of internet porn is the adolescent male and his brain is in the developmental phase of wiring up for sexual cues, then this puts a whole new angle on how sexual orientation can be shaped and how porn can affect sexual identity in combination with other less overt sexual cues from cinema, magazines and other sources from daily life.  Rewiring, desensitization, and sexual disorientation are the results.

Wilson quotes another young user who described this disorientation:

Ryan: I seriously thought I was turning gay. My obsessive thoughts about this issue were so strong that I was contemplating taking a dive off the nearest high-rise. I felt so depressed. I knew I loved girls and I couldn’t love another dude, but why did I have ED? Why did I now need transsexual/gay stuff to get off? It’s like I made a mistake that I cannot correct anymore. I want to go back to my old days when I was only turned on by the female body. […]

One 22 year-old:

During middle school and high school I watched porn for hours. After high school I dated a girl I really liked, but I didn’t feel as much arousal around her as I felt when watching porn. In college I got confused about my sexuality because I wasn’t feeling as much sexual attraction as other people. I was also turned on by gay porn and thought maybe I had latent homosexuality. My senior year I went to sexuality counseling and a coming-out support group for a quarter. Neither brought me closer to understanding sexual orientation or attraction. Yes, I got turned on by some gay porn, but I didn’t feel attraction to, or fantasize about, guys. The gay guys that I met seemed much more certain of their orientation. After a while I wasn’t sure I belonged there. I’ve started feeling more sexual attraction around women now that I’ve cut down on porn and masturbation. [9]

Factor in childhood events and shocking episodes (negative or positive) then sexual orientation turn out to be much more complicated than at first thought.  We live in a culture that continues to thrive on sensation and shock with undercurrents of sexualisation pushing the young to experiment earlier and earlier. This is reflected in part, by the onset of puberty in girls as young as eight, then it should be no surprise that society responds in a Pavlovian manner to more extremes while being tricked into thinking this is quite normal.

As Gary Wilson observes: “Brains desperate for sensation can find anxiety-producing material particularly arousing. Such emotions release extra dopamine (and norepinephrine) in the brain. In essence, they are a response to risk-taking.” [10] It need not be porn that creates the conditioned response – the crucible of our daily lives can easily fit the bill.

As discussed in a previous post, the mainstreaming of pornography now includes the one time fetish for hairless genitals and anal sex now so much a part of sexual preference that it is part of any sexually active individual. Not only do women now consider any trace of hair on their body “gross” but men too are waxing up believing that these sexual cues have always been there.

With so much distortion on show in movies, reality T.V., magazines and the internet and the acceptance and accessibility of amateur and professional porn it is little wonder there are so many mixed messages for the young, where the discovery of one’s normal orientation is lost in a sea of sexual extremes, where the “mechanics of sex” and sensation are the only means to express. Indeed, when sex, seduction and the darker archetypes of the vampire, werewolf and demon are ubiquitous in movies and television series blurring the clear-cut delineation of Good vs. Evil: “… It is no great mystery that, in this confusion, hate and contempt is sometimes shunted over into channels which are normally designed for erotic gratification and for devotion.” [11]

Psychopathological strains will infiltrate any belief that offers fertile ground for distortion of the whole. Therefore: “Only when screened from normal stimuli by pathologic developments is man likely to respond specifically to those that are abnormal.” [12]

The result has been the progressive distortion, relegation and denigration of woman and the feminine and man and the masculine and by extension – the sacred. It is from this perspective (and putting aside Cleckley’s misunderstanding of the source) that we can follow his train of thought and his extraordinarily valuable insights into the nature of pathological narcissism and essential psychopathy.

(For one example of the latest research on the influence of digital media on the young see: The Great Porn Experiment: Gary Wilson at TEDxGlasgow)

[NOTE: As a summary of this series as well as adding many fascinating extra elements to the mix, the subject of sexuality, gender theory as related to the ponerisation of values in our Western societies has been recently covered in an excellent article by Pierre Lescaudron of Sott.net entitled:  Mummy, why is Daddy wearing a dress? Daddy, why does Mummy have a moustache?]

 


Notes

[1] ‘Wiring Sexual Tastes to Hairless Genitals…Oops!’ Psychology Today, By Marian Robinson. January 2 2012.
[2] ‘Homosexual Behavior Largely Shaped By Genetics And Random Environmental Factors,’ScienceDaily, June 28, 2008. “This study looked at 3,826 same-gender twin pairs (7,652 individuals), who were asked about the total numbers of opposite sex and same sex partners they had ever had. The findings showed that 35 per cent of the differences between men in same-sex behaviour (that is, that some men have no same sex partners, and some have one or more) is accounted for by genetics.Rahman explains: “Overall, genetics accounted for around 35 per cent of the differences between men in homosexual behaviour and other individual-specific environmental factors (that is, not societal attitudes, family or parenting which are shared by twins) accounted for around 64 per cent. In other words, men become gay or straight because of different developmental pathways, not just one pathway.” For women, genetics explained roughly 18 per cent of the variation in same-sex behaviour, non-shared environment roughly 64 per cent and shared factors, or the family environment, explained 16 per cent.The study shows that genetic influences are important but modest, and that non-shared environmental factors, which may include factors operating during foetal development, dominate. Importantly, heredity had roughly the same influence as shared environmental factors in women, whereas the latter had no impact on sexual behaviour in men.[…].
This has reinforced by new studies Michael Bailey, a psychologist at Northwestern University in Illinois, [who] “… set out the findings at a discussion event held in conjunction with the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science in Chicago: “Scientists tested the DNA of 400 gay men and found that genes on at least two chromosomes affected whether a man was gay or straight. A region of the X chromosome called Xq28 had some impact on men’s sexual behaviour – though scientists have no idea which of the many genes in the region are involved, nor how many lie elsewhere in the genome.Another stretch of DNA on chromosome 8 also played a role in male sexual orientation – though again the precise mechanism is unclear.” – ‘Male sexual orientation influenced by genes, study shows’ The Guardian, Ian Sample, February 14, 2014.
[3] The Brain That Changes Itself: Stories of Personal Triumph from the Frontiers of Brain Science by Norman Doidge Published by Penguin 2008 | ISBN-10: 014103887X.
[4] op. cit. Robinson.
[5] ‘ Sex Research: The Orgasm Cycle’ May 31, 2010 by Marnia Robinson, Psychology Today.
[6] ‘Can You Trust Your Johnson?’ October 22, 2011 by Gary Wilson, Psychology Today.
[7] Ibid.
[8] Ibid
[9] Ibid.
[10] op. cit. Wilson.
[11] op. cit. Cleckley, (p.270)
[12] Ibid. (p.268)

Sex, Lies and Society V: Minorities

“… if propaganda can bring whole nations to war, why should the sexes be immune?”

– Hervey M. Cleckley M.D.


The belief in homosexuality as the primary link between the sexual abuse of boys and girls has proven to be baseless time and time again, yet the myth persists. [1]

Paedophilia requires the object of desire to be a prepubescent youth so that his or her sexual fantasies may be fulfilled. This may or may not translate into action. Rarely do paedophiles develop an attraction for adults. Paedophilia is more of a sexual fetish and a narcissistic distortion of erotic-love, whereas the child rapist seeks to dominate and regain a sense of power through the sexual abuse of the weakest and the most vulnerable. What is more important for the paedophile is access to young children over and above issues of gender.

Psychologist Anna C. Salter makes the link that there is ingrained cultural association with homosexuality and paedophilia. Therapist Joe Hort agrees: “When a man molests little girls, we call him a ‘pedophile’ and not a ‘heterosexual.’ Of course, when a man molests little boys, people say outright, or mutter under their breath, ‘homosexual.’” [2] As social scientist David Howitt stated: “It is wrong to assume that homosexuality characterizes a fixed and identifiable proportion of the population: the situation is far more complex than this allows.” [3]

Such simplifications feed into false avenues of morality useful for political control. It does not mean a homosexually oriented psychopath cannot traverse all manner of sexual preferences in exactly the same way as the heterosexual psychopath. This does not mean that homosexuality automatically means paedophilia just as it does not mean that heterosexuality equates to preying on underage girls. The key point here is how does psychopathy subvert  – whatever orientation?  The power of sex has always been a socio-political commodity, as we shall see.

The Kinsey Report data on Human Sexuality which gave a “scientific” justification and promotion of a certain type of “sexual revolution” is pertinent in this respect. The Rockefeller funded authors sold the idea that homosexual experiences were common even in sectors of the population who saw themselves as heterosexual. According to Kinsey’s Sexual Behavior in the Human Male (1948) and Sexual Behavior in the Human Female (1953) his data revealed that reported that:

  • 37% of males and 13% of females had at least some overt homosexual experience to orgasm;
  • 10% of males were more or less exclusively homosexual and 8% of males were exclusively homosexual for at least three years between the ages of 16 and 55. For females, Kinsey reported a range of 2-6% for more or less exclusively homosexual experience/response.
  • 4% of males and 1-3% of females had been exclusively homosexual after the onset of adolescence up to the time of the interview. [4]

However, most of the data, methods and sources by which this statistical information was gathered have since been thoroughly disputed if not debunked. With the help of the Rockefeller’s obsession with social engineering and financial clout, the Kinsey reports have been used for comprehensive psycho-sexual conditioning of the populace – including homosexual men.

In 1994, a UK study using statistical criteria and sources far superior to Kinsey’s dubious methods found that the true rate of homosexuality was about 1 percent which “received considerable adverse criticism.” This tells us more about how entrenched the findings of the Kinsey report had become than any objective analysis of the data. Regarding paedophilia: “One implication of such low rates, of course, is that homosexuals are more marginal than suggested by previous studies and less than a numerically substantial minority.  Such low estimates also have implications for interpreting the high rates of boy-orientation among paedophiles.” In summary: “knowing the nature of an adult’s sexual involvement with children says little or nothing about their orientation to adult men or women.” [5]

sexual minorities© infrakshun

The question that also needs to be asked is: how much of our sexuality is contoured toward orientations which are socially engineered rather than a result of natural development? When Rockefeller social science is involved you can bet your bottom dollar that they have a vested interest in changing Western societies. (We will explore how and why in later posts).

What seems to be key is this: it matters little whether the individual is heterosexual or homosexual but how the individual is manifesting an encouraged sexual psychopathy. Sexual preferences can be ponerised and used as tools of mass control just like any other human orientation. Minority rights can be co-opted and used for purposes which are entirely counter to promoting basic rights and defence against prejudice. Psychopathy subverts and distorts “normal” homosexual relations within society exacerbating and feeding an already sensitive state prone to disequilibrium due to the nature of same sex relations as a minority orientation thus against the tide of the majority. Inversions graduate to places of influence on the public at large due in part to the nature of the deviancy and those who are aware of mass psychology and can use it to further their own ends.

Nonetheless, sexual psychopathy transcends orientation with the resulting promotion of psychopathological preferences taking over loving, intimate relations. Some argue that homosexuality is more open to such influences due to an “unnatural” biological pairing of male to male or female to female. Such speculation cannot be proven either way and is a fruitless line of inquiry. Psychopaths infiltrate and dominate sexuality if there is a potential for loving adult relations whatever the sexual orientation. Yet, it may be the case within a minority belief system of sexual orientation this fact alone can be used to mainstream and promote a propaganda of divide and rule, confusion and dogma under the guise of minority rights as stated.

Where that potential exists you will find expressions of a long and concerted attempt to contour the normal homosexual and heterosexual relations towards an entropic view of sexuality. And this means replacing the creative, feminine, receptive and nurturing qualities of our society towards the narcissistic, cynical, hateful, sadistic-masochistic, brutal, violent, nihilistic and animalistic qualities that resonate along the reality pathway of the psychopath. In other words, the object of distortion and hatred is the embodiment of the feminine: in both men and women; it is the cooperative and inclusive ideals which are under attack. And if you follow the history of monotheistic religions and patriarchal structures that arose out of such mass programming you will see that the defining factor in such “progress” is the subjugation, the degradation and gradual desacralisation of all that we associate with healthy relations between men and women, sexual minorities and by extension, our place in society and the natural world.

Cleckley’s Instructive Mistake

Homosexuality has always been a part of the human experience and always will be. This post is not about taking issue with person’s natural orientation, the rights of which I’d always defend. What I’d like to do here is to explore the concept that psychopathy can work through any grouping and have the potential to subvert its laudable aims. This will prove to be much more pertinent and in the context of Establishment abuse which will be further explored in future posts.

Hervey_Cleckley

Hervey M. Cleckley

Hervey M. Cleckley is known for his out of print but ground-breaking book on psychopaths: The Mask of Sanity. His lesser known work: The Cariacature of Love (1957) tackles the subject of homosexuality. It is a product of its time in that he was unapologetic in his conclusion that it was a mental illness and thus in need of treatment, which would partly explain why this book is not in print. [6] However, the obvious anti-homosexual position is not the real reason that the book has disappeared from view since it holds valuable information as to how psychopathy can manifest through a minority sexual orientation. Cleckley was not aware of the dynamics of ponerology at this time and made the mistake of attributing homosexuality in general as a pathological expression rather than examples of essential psychopathy grafted onto sexual orientation and working through it. It is these extremes that caught his attention in the book. 

To illustrate this point, look at this example from Cleckley in which I substituted “homosexual” for “psychopath” and “homosexuality” for “psychopathy” as indicated in parenthesis:

But it is not only with such overt examples of [psychopathy] as a theme for popular or highbrow art that we must deal. People buying these books, for instance, know what they are getting and, presumably, buy them for that very reason. Where the phenomena of [psychopathy] are brought right out in the open, the non-[psychopath] at least has the chance to orient himself before exposure. The problem raised by Belvedere* is that most people who watch his antics don’t know what he is. His character and his incidental predilections are left intact; it is only the fact of his specific sexual anomaly that has been excised. Thus it is those books, movies, magazines etc, where it is not clearly labelled for all to see—that raise the delicate and difficult question: what pervasive influence, subconscious or otherwise, does a steady diet of [psychopathically]-motivated art have upon the non-[psychopath / pathological narcissist]? [7]

[…]  Art arising from pathologic and perverse viewpoints seems to have immediate and specific appeal to men and women suffering from similar emotional illness. Those who find the normal goals of human life unacceptable or distasteful are likely to greet with enthusiasm poetry or philosophy that reflects an appraisal similar to their own. If they find the ordinary premises of life hateful they are likely to hail as truth and beauty expressions of rejection by another. Perhaps it is not surprising that such reactions and tastes appear as achievements of exquisite discernment, as a precious wisdom available only to the elect, to coteries of sexually distorted and often brilliant intellectuals who in each generation are drawn together through veneration for the morbid. [8] [Emphasis mine]

Regardless of whether narcissistic, post-modern thought or gay identities are operating, the impetus behind these influences is mainstreamed categories of psychopathy:

… Our altered attitude toward [psychopathy], whether fostered by [psychopaths] or the result of an enlightened tolerance toward them, … has brought about a new kind of Gentlemen’s Agreement, by which the minority seeks to impose its views of life and love upon the majority. The reluctance on the part of creators, critics and informed audiences to utter the “nasty word,” or the implication that it has no bearing if they do, is the cause; and a gradual effeminization of artistic and sexual values, the foreseeable result.

If it is true that some of the very greatest poets and philosophers and artists were sexually disordered, and the evidence for this seems strong, there is little doubt that some deviated geniuses are able to express profound matters in human experience without reflecting primarily the distortions and abnormal evaluations so common in their disorder. In current literature, nevertheless, and in well-known works from the past, many examples demonstrate the dispirited, perversely cynical, and one might say life-hating, reactions and judgments that I believe are typical of the brilliant and aggressive homosexual.[9] [Emphasis mine]

And the “aggressive homosexual” that the author mentions is in all probability exhibiting either pathological narcissism, if not full–blown psychopathy with the consequent re-modelling of our cultural norms. In other words, it is merely psychopathy appropriating homosexuality as one convenient medium through which to ponerise society. It is also interesting that this type of “aggression” is directed at the feminine qualities in man and womankind in general. Similarly this same aggression manifests in various groups and organisations across the spectrum of culture and politics. Subversion and distortion comes from narcissism and the gamut of psychopathic anomalies which push a noble idea  into its shadow side.

Cleckley gives varied examples in literature of the early part of the 20th century to illustrate the misanthropic, woman-hating themes on show. Commensurate with sexual pathology and the Don Juan conquistadores of the sexual predator, a loathing of the feminine and the qualities therein underscores a threat to the dominance of the male – a complete distortion of the relationship of male and female polarity, or in Cleckley’s words: “…these men condemn her as a biologic fraud, a ghastly and detestable blunder of nature. […] They can only point to woman as a biologic monstrosity. Discovering that insofar as she is genuinely woman she is not a sexually perfect man, they perversely see in the very features that give her status as female only the most revolting deformity.” [10]

A theme that runs throughout the history of psychopath’s domination of both gay and heterosexual men and women and the attempts to engage a more loving, receptive mode of living to emerge, where the man’s real role as supporter and protector of the woman simultaneously allows the feminine qualities to reside within him and the masculine to reside in the woman in equal “quantities” without imbalance. Love is cynically marginalised as quaint or fake. Nihilism,  mechanical sex and instinct replaces it.

Cleckley was describing the cultural milieu of the late 1950s but the psychopath’s propaganda has continued unabated causing confusion, loss of identity and the burgeoning of extremes across the psycho-sexual spectrum:

The truth is this: if one wants to be in the know as far as poetry, fiction, the theatre, magazines and movies go these days—woman or no woman—one has got to expose oneself to art which is [pathological / psychopathic] in nature. But this raises the question: How much exposure does it take before infection, mild or otherwise, sets in? Can women continually see members of their sex destroyed, mocked, isolated and humiliated; pictured as shrews, whores, idiots and mantraps, and retain any self-confidence or sense of personal worth? And can non-[pathological] men swallow the same amount without eventually corning to think that their wives, sweethearts, sisters and mothers have something of the “menacing, aggressive Poles” about them? To say “no,” is to conclude that art has no effect whatsoever on the people who give their attention to it. We know this is not true, and if propaganda can bring whole nations to war, why should the sexes be immune?  [11]  [Emphasis mine]

When such narcissism and sexual psychopathy became normalised in society it is little wonder that normal gay men just like heterosexuals also exhibited the ponerisation of that sexuality as a whole. Once again: if propaganda can bring whole nations to war, why should the sexes be immune?”

It appears that sexual perversity in all its forms is concerned with aggression, violence, degradation, fear and defiance rather than love. It is the reaffirmation of the pathological ego and its power which is seen as something to celebrate in popular culture. And how do love and the sense of the sacred compete with such “norms” when seen as entertainment, whilst politically correct channels are entirely unaware of the nature ponerogenesis and indeed, fuel its manifestations further? Cleckley believes: “… that perversions are aberrations of the impulses of aggressiveness and domination directed towards a sexual object. Their character is a blending of a large proportion of ego-drives with a minor quantity of sex-urge,” [12] and which traverse all sexual orientations.

The defining factor is a greater narcissism and psychopathology encouraged to multiply within society.

 


Notes

[1] op.cit; Howitt: “While some paedophiles are homosexually orientated towards both adults and children, this does not in itself demonstrate a causal association between the two. There are a number of issues: (1) Uncertainty about the rates of paedophilia in heterosexual and homosexual men; (2) Uncertainty about the rates of homosexuality among adult men; (3) The apparent sexual preference of some heterosexual people for adult females while offending against boys. […] “It is important to distinguish homosexuality directed towards adults from that directed towards underage children. This allows us to see that adult-orientated homosexuals are no more likely to become sexually involved with children than are heterosexuals.” (p. 47).“There were no peer-oriented homosexual males in our sample who regressed to children. Homosexuality and homosexual pedophilia are not synonymous. In fact, it may be that these two orientations are mutually exclusive, the reason being that the homosexual male is sexually attracted to masculine qualities whereas the heterosexual male is sexually attracted to feminine characteristics, and the sexually immature child’s qualities are more feminine than masculine … In any case, in over 12 years of clinical experience working with child molesters, we have yet to see any example of a regression from an adult homosexual orientation. The child offender who is also attracted to and engaged in adult sexual relationships is heterosexual. It appears, therefore, that the adult heterosexual male constitutes a greater sexual risk to underage children than does the adult homosexual male.” (p.48).
[2] ‘Homosexuality and Pedophilia: The False link’ by Joe Kort, 2004 | www. joekort.com/articles50.htm(Originally published in In the Family magazine Fall, 2003)
[3] op. cit. Howitt (p.46)
[4] Kinsey Institute – ‘The Prevalence of Homosexuality’ http://www.iub.edu/~kinsey/resources/bib-homoprev.html
[5] op. cit. Howitt (p.48)
[6] The Caricature of Love: A Discussion of Social, Psychiatric, and Literary Manifestations of Pathologic Sexuality by Hervey M. Cleckley, M.D.,Clincial Professor of Psychiatry and Neurology Medical College of Georgia Chief of Service, Psychiatry and Neurology University Hospital Augusta. The Roland Press Co. New York. 1957.
[7]    Ibid. (p.198)
[8]    Ibid. (p.219)
[9]    Ibid. (p.199)
[10]  Ibid. (p.230)
[11]  Ibid. (p.203)
[12]  Ibid. (p.285)

Sex, Lies and Society IV: Waxing the Line

250px-Chest_waxing_cropped-vertEroticism and sensuality is part of the tradition of many ancient religions. A healthy “earthiness” is a natural part of the human experience. It may well be that many parents experience sexual feelings for their children at some stages of their interaction, however fleeting. Similarly, the depiction of erotic images can elicit an array of responses from all ages, child, mother, father, brother and sister and with an equal number of programmed feelings.

How this sexual energy is expressed, creatively, lovingly or selfishly, depends on many developmental factors from experiences in childhood and the formative years. At the same time, innocent eroticism and the healthy expression of our sensuality can be demonised in part, from a severe misunderstanding of the power of sexual cues which have been distorted by religion, advertising, pornography and info-tainment.

What is disturbing in the context of paedophilia for males and females is the effects of our body and pornography obsessed culture which makes us so unhappy with our physicality and self-concept. For instance, the mainstreaming preference for hairless genitals! When did such a thing become so gross? As psychologist Marnia Robinson observes: “Are we waxing away the line between adults and children?” [1]

And it doesn’t stop there as Robinson reveals:

In today’s porn world, … ‘shaved,’ like anal sex, is de rigueur. We now hear younger men saying they will have nothing (sexual) to do with an unshaven female. What has happened? Adolescent porn users are cutting their teeth on depilated sirens. This is just when their brains are most sensitive to reward and furiously wiring their sexual arousal to associated cues—in this case, hairless genitals. This same process affects some adult viewers, too. […]…also labia surgery to eradicate signs of sexual maturity are increasingly common. Using shaving and surgery, women are deliberately neotenizing their genitals, that is, intentionally making them look immature, juvenile. [2]

In a nut-shell, these trends can only feed into the normalising of sexual extremes. Those who practice paedophilia and child molestation as a way of life thrive on the same, relying on misguided politically correct ignorance borne from intentionally created confusion that limits preventative measures. Establishment paedophiles and/or child rapists need the public to be kept busy with paedophile rights and paedophile vigilantism while blurring the lines between eroticism, love, sexual perversion and pathology – all serving to protect institutional abuse that operates above the law.

As Robinson eloquently points out:

“Is this change in conditioned visual tastes removing an evolved barrier that once discouraged adult sex with children? If this is a possibility, how can we, as a society, hope to have an open discussion about it? Or even do reliable research? Given the willingness of today’s authorities to assume any sexual response to images of minors proves someone is a paedophile, who would dare to discuss such feelings except on an anonymous Internet forum…maybe?” [3]

In case the reader thinks that the move to hairless women and men is trivial and the discerning porn and multi-media user is ultimately in control, you’d be labouring under a false assumption. As Pavlov’s experiments * in conditioned response showed, the dogs salivated after they heard the bell alone, regardless of the circumstances. And in relation to the plasticity of our brains: “once we wire up a cue, we have no way of knowing when it will trigger a reaction” and thus such “new wiring” does not necessarily have anything to do with sexual orientation but the neurological pathways they create. This could have serious consequences in a world that is fast becoming paranoid and civil liberty free. Moreover, in this climate of internet hysteria concerning paedophile websites and the dubious nature of police entrapment antics it is hardly likely that any meaningful discourse is going to filter through to where it’s needed: in the bastions of local and international law.

There is a school of thought within academia intent on legitimising paedophilia rather than treating it. The “sexual self-determination” that deems children as adults is a twist on the truth that delivers them into paedophiles who benefit from such para-logical discourse.

Child abuse is the result of many complex and problematic issues that should be not trivialised and its social impact and brevity reduced. Some of the most vocal exponents of in the last twenty years who advocate paedophile rights over treatment include Bruce Rind, Philip Tromovitch, Robert Bausermann and Judith Levine.  They have also tried to prove that child abuse is vastly overestimated, even to the extent that it may not exist. The media, while touting sensationalist stories and stoking fear on the one hand, has also given a great deal of coverage to these views. The academic credentials of Rind, Tromovitch and Bausermann are negated by their astonishing bias which amounts to a trumpeting of paedophile rights at the expense of their victims. And yet, with the censorship issues and Establishment wrangling creating sexual witchunts, the truth, as is so often the case is somewhere between these two extremes.

Rind’s influential collection of studies on the impact of child abuse, conclude that it is largely a symptom of family dysfunction rather than actual sexual abuse. [4] Statistics were produced from select college samples to prove this point. Other conclusions suggested that the age of consent was subject to whether or not violence is involved. If the child – with no distinction to age – gives consent, then it is not abuse. If violent coercion emerges then this is abuse. Even the term “abuse” was to be replaced by the “adult-child” or adult-adolescent sex.

Once again, paedophile apologists fail to distinguish between the emotional differences between child and adult; they fail to address the effects of abuse from non-coercive methods thus excluding the highly manipulative nature of abusers. They place the onus on the child as instigator rather than the victim and manage to twist socio-cultural statistics to fit their own clear bias for sex between adults and children.

This is not to say that all the data collected is without merit, only the methods by which they collected this data and the final conclusions they came to were very far from impartial. Context is everything. The idea that child abuse was really not all that bad and that we were all overreacting and taking an anti-scientific stance are classic symptoms of ponerology agents doing what they do best – seeding pathogens of confusion and dissonance.

The Journal of Paidika (1987-1995) was published in the Netherlands (where the age of sexual consent is twelve) is, in its own words: “… a scholarly journal which seeks to examine the range of cultural, historical, psychological, and literary issues pertaining to consensual adult-child sexual relationships and desires. The journal was attempting to create a “history of record subject to academic peer-review” and “subscribed to by prestigious institutions such as the British Library and “…the Library of Congress.” Unfortunately, while this implies rigorous science the reality is somewhat different. Paidika, by its own admission was a journal concerned with placing the scientific acceptance of paedophile’s rights firmly on the academic agenda. However, reading the material one is left with the overwhelming realisation that there is only pseudo-science to be found, gift-wrapped for the paedophile intelligentsia.

Extreme narcissists and those with psychopathic tendencies will always use the very same accusations from critics to deflect the perceived attacks against their nature. Rind and Bausermann published articles in the journal for a number of years before their “meta-analysis” appeared on the scene. Both have gone out of their way to promote and defend the scientific justification for seeing paedophilia as just another way to express oneself sexually.

Persons such as author Judith Levine can be commended for raising the issue of child agency power, over-protection and those profiting from child abuse. However, her simplification and selective data is dangerously misleading. For someone who proposes an age of consent to be dropped to twelve and with many of her sources from closet or “practicing” paedophiles, we can understand how Levine’s bias then colours that research. [5] She believes paedophiles can be cured rather than treated without the distinction as to whether we are dealing with sexual psychopaths for example. As the association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers clearly state: “… there is no known ‘cure.’ [6]

The underreported fact that her key source for much of her statistical data and analyses came from her hero Lawrence Stanley for whom academic paedophilia was not simply confined to white papers.  He was convicted in absentia, by a Dutch court in 1998 for sexual abuse of three 7 to 10-year-old girls and faces a three-year prison sentence if he returns to the Netherlands. With the Netherland’s liberal reputation regarding paedophilia you can imagine the case details must have been rather convincing. At the time of writing, Stanley has yet to face charges for sexually assaulting a girl in Canada who was under the age of 14 and according to a wire services report in The Miami Herald was finally arrested and charged with possession of child pornography in Brazil. [7]

The US paedophile activists have received much support from the liberal traditions of Scandinavia and Northern Europe which have also given opportunities for more repellent forms of “sexual liberation” to take hold. The Netherlands seems to have a strange predilection for this kind of degeneration, where an often valuable and responsible progressive tradition goes headlong over the edge. In fact, in Holland the audacity of Dutch paedophiles fighting for their right to abuse children in their own country launched a new political party in May 2006 called The Charity, Freedom and Diversity  Party (NVD) which stands for some interesting forms of “emancipation” including:

  • Private possession of child pornography to be allowed; (though a ban on trading such material)
  • The broadcasting of pornography on daytime television, with only violent pornography limited to the late evening.
  • Toddlers should be given sex education.
  • Youths aged 16 and up should be allowed to appear in pornographic films and prostitute themselves.
  • Sex with animals should be allowed although abuse of animals should remain illegal.
  • Everybody should be allowed to go naked in public.
  • The legalization of all soft and hard drugs.
  • Free train travel for all.

This is similar to the way monotheistic religions work by including a few vital truths floating in a sea of ponerological influences. Sweden went one step further than their Dutch neighbours by lifting the ban that had been imposed on homosexuality in 1944, along with … Bestiality.

According to the country’s first government-commissioned study horses are the species most often sexually abused. The government last year tasked the Swedish Animal welfare Agency to determine the scope of the problem including whether or not the animals suffer psychologically from the abuse. A person can be found guilty of cruelty to animals if prosecutors can prove that the animal suffered physical or psychological injury.

One has to question from which reality those who presided over the legalisation of such a law and what criteria they used to come to such a conclusion other than that they were quite partial to these activities themselves. Having sex with animals and then using tax payer’s money to determine if the animal enjoyed the experience or was less than satisfied, seems to an odd way to address the balance.

Meanwhile, as money being spent on commissioned studies to determine whether horses have Post Traumatic Stress, victimised children are falling through the net and justice is being ignored. This naturally raises questions regarding the suitability of a judicial system that legalises sex with animals while claiming to uphold the moral integrity required for sexual abuse cases of human beings. It seems that we should be not only keeping a watchful eye on our children, but our pets as well.

Finland too has curious laws which appear to favour predators. In 1996 police discovered a “massive computer library of child pornography that included pictures of torture, mutilation, and cannibalism.” However, the owner of the child pornography evaded arrest because distributing hard-core child pornography is a minor offence in Finland.

Is it any wonder that sexual pathologies are on the rise?

 


* Experiments carried out by 1890’s Russian physiologist Ivan Pavlov who developed his ideas of conditioned and unconditioned responses. For example, dogs don’t learn to salivate whenever they see food being hard wired into the dog. He noticed that his dogs would begin to salivate whenever he entered the room, even when he was not bringing them food. He also found that any object or event which the dogs learnt to associate with food would trigger the same salivating response thus leading to the scientific discovery of Pavlovian conditioning.
** A reminder: Paralogism: n. illogical or fallacious deduction. paralogical, paralogistic, a. paralogize, v.i. be illogical; draw unwarranted conclusions. Paralogist | n. conversive thinking: subconscious selection and substitution of data leading to chronic avoidance of the crux of the matter.

Notes

[1] Wiring Sexual Tastes to Hairless Genitals…Oops!’ Psychology Today, By Marian Robinson. January 2 2012.
[2] Ibid.
[3] Ibid.
[4] pp. 22-53; A Meta-Analytic Examination of Assumed Properties of Child Sexual Abuse Using College Samples; Bruce Rind, Philip Tromovitch & Robert Bauserman; in: Psychological Bulletin 1998, 124-1.
[5] Harmful to Minors: The Perils of Protecting Children from Sex by Judith Levine.
[6] Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers (ATSA) http://www.atsa.com/
[7] ‘American Association for Nudist Recreation’ (ASA) lawyer arrested in Brazil; charged with child exploitation By Robert Stacy McCain THE WASHINGTON TIMES, July 24, 2002.