The signs of pedo-acceptance have slowly crept into the crypts of the left since the postmodernist (or, Woke) revolution. Early indicators are observable at contemporary Pride Parades, where more and more participants are accepting of adolescent attendees–at these parades children are in close proximity to male genitalia, sexual items and paraphernalia. In 2019, Elijah Schaffer interviewed a man wearing only a Crown Royal bag around his sexual organs. During the interview children were passing by about a meter in front of the man’s pelvis.
The watering down of pedo-intolerance isn’t only at these annual events, or is it of outlier nature. The Washington Post published an op-ed titled, “Yes, Kink Belongs At Pride. And I Want My Kids To See It“, and albeit satire, the San Francisco Gay Men’s Chorus’ video was disturbing. For one to deny the rise of pedo-acceptance they’d have to wield some impressive intellectual dishonesty–or cognitive dissonance.
Now, some are moving to destigmatize being sexually attracted to minors and view it as something separable from a moral framework.
Prostasia, an organization subjected to much scrutiny, interviewed professor Allyn Walker about her book “A Long Dark Shadow: Minor Attracted People and Their Pursuit of Dignity”. Prostasia asserts its advocation against child sexual abuse, though has an aberrant stance, “We believe it’s possible to protect children while upholding our societies most important values–such as tolerance, diversity and freedom.”
Walker was questioned on her reasoning for titling the book as such,
“I use the term ‘minor attracted person’, or MAP, in the title and throughout the book for multiple reasons. First of all, because I think it’s important to use terminology for groups that members of that group want other to use for them, and MAP advocacy groups (like Before You Act) have advocated for the use of the term “MAP”. They’ve advocated for it primarily because it’s less stigmatizing then other terms like pedophile … I’ve definitely heard of the idea, though, that the use of the term “MAP” suggests that it’s OK to be attracted to children, but using a term that communicates who someone is attracted to doesn’t indicate anything about the morality of that attraction. From my perspective there is no morality or immorality attached to attraction to anyone.” she said.
This, is where leftism and conservatism divide. The conservative position submits pedophilia is deontologically wrong–and doesn’t require anymore explanatory power because being attracted to children is wrong within of itself–but this arising, pedo-accepting leftism posits pedophilia isn’t harmful if it doesn’t directly harm children. When this logic is applied it results in children within close proximity to bare male genitalia in the aforementioned Pride Parade.
Prostasia interviewed Jillian York in 2019, who is Director of International Freedom of Expression at the Electronic Frontier Foundation. York and the interviewer began discussing censorship of fictional, sexual material that involves children in it–like some anime cartoons.
York said: “… of course it makes sense to protect real children from harm, but when it comes to cartoons, fictional characters, things like that … I think that it’s a bit of a stretch to suggest that these characters need to be protected. I do feel that fictionalized images should be considered very distinct from real images, and I think that when we talk about the things that need to be kept in view we should be looking at a more narrow definition of censorship, and that includes anything that causes harm to an individual … I do feel that this is something where we should be thinking a little bit harder about what the harms actually are, whether there are any actual benefits to allowing these images to exist.“
The interviewer and York continue to converse about written fantasy involving children, questioning if such content should be censored.
It is demonstrable. This type of pragmatism leads to licentiousness. Protastia and the interviewed guests think pedophilia, the attraction itself, is separable of the moral realm because it offers no harm to children. The slippery slope is self-evident.
But, leftists will criticize any mention of a slippery slope and use mental gymnastics to avoid the inevitable moral obscenities–the slippery slope can only be ignored until society tumbles down the headwaters of abomination.
Yes, pedophilia should be frowned upon. Adults sexually attracted to minors, irrespective of physical manifestations or harm to children, is morally grotesque. The buck must stop somewhere–and conservatives stake their position that being sexually attracted to minors is wrong. How long until claims will surface that children can consent to sexual acts with adults? Children dancing on runways, being around naked men, and certainly, an iota of sexual attraction an adult may have towards children is wrong and shouldn’t be tolerated.
Want to stay updated? Sign up for our newsletter to receive weekly content right to your inbox.