A few weeks ago, members of the religious right was attempting to connect a polygamy court case to the gay community and marriage equality. Now it’s pedophilia. Next month, it will probably be bestiality
While the gay community have been busy with other matters, members of the religious right are perpetrating a slow but consistent march to a claim that acceptance of homosexuality will soon lead to the acceptance of pedophilia.
The key here is that these folks are not saying that pedophilia and homosexuality are connected, but rather are using a faulty “slippery slope” argument, i.e. – “just like the gay community is receiving more acceptance, pretty soon the pedophiles will be getting more acceptance.”
It began when the Liberty Counsel’s Matt Barber and a researcher by the name of Judith Reisman attended a recent symposium of a group – B4U-Act – who is seeking to reduce “stigmatization and stereotyping of people who are attracted to children.”
Barber is no stranger to the gay community for his offensive anti-gay comments, but Reisman is not that widely known.
All you need to know about her is that she is a former songwriter for the show “Captain Kangaroo” who suddenly became a researcher (she does have a doctorate, but it’s in communications). According to writer Terry Krepel, she was given a federal grant of more than $784,000 to study 30 years worth of Playboy magazines. Her findings were dismissed as “paranoid pseudoscientific hyperbole.”
Reisman later wrote a silly book accusing sex researcher Alfred Kinsey of child abuse. When the Kinsey Institute easily batted down her charges, she sued it for defamation and emotional distress, claiming that it tried to censor her book. Not only was the case dismissed, but it was dismissed with prejudice, which means Reisman could not re-file it.
One shouldn’t worry too much about Reisman, however, because she has made a name for herself in right-wing circles not only through her anti-Kinsey nonsense but also by claiming that gays are recruiting children:
At a May, 1994 conference of Christian right leadership in Colorado Springs described by the Washington Times as “top secret,” Reisman introduced her theory of a proselytizing homosexual movement. “I would suggest to you,” she told the conference, “that while the homosexual population may right now be one to two percent, hold your breath, people, because the recruitment is loud; it is clear; it is everywhere. You’ll be seeing, I would say, 20 percent or more, probably 30 percent, or even more than that, of the young population will be moving into homosexual activity.”
Anyway, Reisman and Barber attended this ridiculous symposium of this virtually unknown group and reported on what was said there. Their report was pretty much ignored by folks with common sense.
Naturally this means that the religious right, including the National Organization for Marriage, and other right-wing sources welcomed the report with open arms and publicized it as legitimate.
And now, according to Equality Matters, this now includes Fox News. Apparently publicizing Barber and Reisman’s sojourn is the latest in the “slippery slope” angle Fox is trying to push to connect the gay community to pedophilia:
On August 11, the website posted a column by Fox News contributor and anti-gay pseudoscientist Dr. Keith Ablow, in which he compared homosexuality to pedophilia and asserted that both gays and pedophiles could alter their sexual orientations as a result of environmental factors.On August 25, FoxNews.com posted yet another Ablow column — “Paving the Way for Condoning Child Rape” — in which the “Fox News Medical A-Team” member lamented a recent symposium put together by B4U-Act, a group that seeks to reduce the stigmatization and stereotyping of people who are attracted to children:
But, now, there should be no doubt that our culture is poised to begin embracing pedophilia as a lifestyle choice, just like homosexuality. A group of psychiatrists and other mental health professionals called B4U-Act, which has representatives from Harvard and Johns Hopkins, gathered recently in Baltimore to organize their push to change the negative perception of pedophiles and encourage them to get help in a nonjudgmental environment.
While B4U-Act is not representative of mainstream psychiatry, and while the American Psychiatric Association (APA) did not participate in the group’s meeting, psychiatry has a history of caving into cultural pressure to stop defining controversial illnesses as pathological. You won’t even find ego-dystonic homosexuality—meaning, homosexual impulses that cause an individual to feel distressed and which that individual does not want to give into—in the DSM, anymore. [emphasis added]
Take note of the highlighted parts of Ablow’s column – B4U-Act is not in the mainstream of psychiatry nor did the American Psychiatric Association participate in the group’s symposium. Those are facts.
Ablow’s sad speculation about the field of psychiatry is merely a poor job of trying to deflect from those facts.
Equality Matters goes on to say that FoxNews.com also published an article – on the front page – about the B4U-Act symposium and made a dubious claim:
Critics of the effort also note that the movement likens its fight for pedophilia acceptance to society’s more recent embrace of homosexuality. They warn of a slippery slope to a time when pedophilia is “just another lifestyle choice” that won’t warrant criminal charges—and will leave young children at risk.
Equality Matters said that the article did not identify the “critics.”
Followers of Fox News – most specifically the televised shows – know that when hosts, such as Megyn Kelly or Gretchen Carlson, say things like critics say or some folks claim, it’s usually an introduction for them to sneak in a talking point.
And now Peter LaBarbera and his hate group, Americans for Truth, is involved. He featured an interview with Barber on the symposium. My guess is that we will be hearing less about the unknown group and more about the so-called “evils of homosexuality.”
So it appears that there is an abandoning claiming that gays are pedophiles in lieu of the false claim that “if America accepts homosexuality, pretty soon it will accept pedophilia.”
It’s a ridiculous claim. A few weeks ago, members of the religious right was attempting to connect a polygamy court case to the gay community and marriage equality. Now it’s pedophilia.
Next month, it will probably be bestiality.
It’s always amazing to me how people whose goals are always destructive can think of so many avenues to pursue them.
The right’s attempt to connect an unknown group’s desire to push pedophilia to the very real legitimacy of same-sex relationships and families says less about homosexuality and more about their desperation to smear the gay community.
It’s hilarious on one point because it’s doomed to fail. However, it’s sad on two other points.
The first point is how the gay community yet again has to endure the pedophile smear. The second point is personal. It just pains me to realize that folks like Barber and Reisman are making gobs of money by appealing to the ignorance of the mysterious, but much-moneyed folks who fund their mess.
Oh well. That adage of “God generally shows what he thinks about money but whom he gives lots of it to” definitely applies here.




31 Comments


Hi, Alvin, welcome!
Looking forward to your excellent reporting in this area. I’ve so enjoyed reading your work at Pam’s.
Hrrrm.
Um, this isn’t new. All of it still traces back to the book from the late 1800′s that cemented the idea of homosexuality as bad in the first place.
Sexual Psychopathy: a Clinical-Forensic Study postulated
This early book written and widely accepted long before Freud’s work reached a similar standing was created by an individual who felt that the only purpose for sex was strictly procreation. As a result, any form of sex that was not strictly for procreation was a perversion — a
cerebral neuroses of a sort labeled paraesthesia (sex for a purpose other than procreative,and a term that later became paraphilia).
Into this category was included sexual fetishism, masochism, and pedophilia.
That book was so widely distributed that it often sat on the shelves of a country Doctor, right next to the Bible.
In turn, it found its way into the social efforts of a group that sought to end certain activities that were believed responsible for a wide variety of social ills, notably the drinking of alcohol.
And that led to the leadership of that movement, including people who were deeply involved in the then revisions of the Revised Standard Bible and similar.
This is just a continuation of the same effort begun a hundred years ago, and since science has moved long past the ideas of that age, they can no longer rely on it, and instead rely on the belief that their predecessor’s inserted into that faith a hundred years ago.
I fear for the safety of their wives.
What pathetic little bigots these people are. Have they never heard of consent? No, never mind…if the frequency of rightwingers committing sex crimes is anything to go by, they in fact have not.
Are LGBT issues the sole focus of this site?
No but they are the main course at The Blend.
Thanks.
Psychologists rarely make sense. It’s all based on nothing.
What astonishes me continually is that there are still LGBT Republicans who will make either some excuse for this behavior or just say, “Yeah that’s a terrible thing to say about the community but……”.
Those guys always remind me of the “queue scene” in Blazing Saddles.
“See? It’s coming off.”
More government waste. $784,000 to study 30 years of Playboy. I woulda done it for nuthin’, man.
No doubt…! But, wtf is there to study…? The centerfolds’ various dimensions over the years, the Letters to the Editor…?
That book was so widely distributed that it often sat on the shelves of a country Doctor, right next to the Bible.
Wow, what a cool historical insight…! Mahalo, Antonia…! *g*
which sat right next to Playboy.
At the risk of inciting (verbal) violence from the FDL crowd, let me point out that when the gay rights movement started, or re-started, in the 60s it was populated with what would now be called “pedophiles” but at the time were gay guys who liked boys down to about 13 or 14. The “boylovers” were conveniently stigmatized and marginalized so that “normal” gay people, mainly men, could more easily gain the social and legal acceptance they enjoy today without having to defend age-old homosexual practices. (Ancient Greeks, and so on – adult-to-adult homosexuality was considered an aberration while (check the art on those vases) adult-to-teen was held in high esteem.)
In fact the slippery slope exists and if we slide we’d liberate quite a few younger gay people. Do you have anything but opinions and personal observation that separates a gay man who likes 19-year-olds from one who likes 14-year-olds? Or two 15-year-olds who like each other, for that matter?
This is an old argument among the gay lib crowd. Of course I am not accepting view that all non-hetero sex or relationships is perverse; almost the opposite. I’m suggesting we embrace a more inclusive view. But stop at 14 and no horses.
At the risk of inciting (verbal) violence from the FDL crowd…
*heh* Contrary to popular belief, we really don’t bite…! We might nip…!
Explain how those confused what-ifs of yours regarding age are any different from the same issue involving mixed-gender couples.
(And I’m not going to bother to repond to your Anita Bryant version of gay rights history. It’s not “verbal violence” you’re inciting, it’s eye-rolling.)
If you are what you eat, maybe you’re also what you talk.
No, but human issues are.
Exactly what part of the phrase “informed consent” do you find confusing?
1)Slippery Slope: It’s true. There is a slippery slope.
“Negroes” get to vote after the civil war, then women got to vote, then blacks get the right to equal but not separate, then homosexuals get equal protection and equal marriage rights. The next thing you know, aetheists and Muslims will be treated equally. And that’s supposed to be bad?
(Liberals made each of those happen. Religious groups fought each and every one of those segregation steps.)
2)Fact-Free thinking is preached again by the Radical Right. The American Psychiatric Association stripped Homosexuality of it’s place as a disease when research failed to substantiate any difference in disfunction, symptomatology, legal behavior, arrests, drug or alcohol abuse. More recently the scientific panel of experts at the Schwarzenager v State of California hearing to overturn Proposition 8 in California, clobbered the Evangelical and Catholic “experts” to the point that all but 3 of the orignal 10 experts dropped out when cross-examined in a court of law with a standard of proof requiring substantiation. There wasn’t substantiation. Study after study showed that there was no difference in same sex families as to homosexuality freqency in the children raised by same-sex parents, drug or alcohol usage, criminal behavior, academic achievement and criminal behavior itself. Indistinguishable two groups.
The Radical Right can talk its research-unsubstantiated ideas about homosexuality as an evangelical religion, out to recrute conversions, but coming out of the closet isn’t increasing the number of new openly gay Americans by religiously converting Heterosexual people. Right wing religious Radicals just can’t give up Homosexuality as evil behavior, a non-inherited trait. They have to have someway for gays to save face if they want to stay where the live, work, interacts with family, friends and work.
Well, here’s a countervailing post over at JMG:
http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2011/08/all-heterosexual-men-are-pedophiles.html
If we were vigilant in publicizing all the heterosexual pedophiles out there, maybe the vicious heterosexists and cissexists might sing a different tune.
Sadly it’s not new, the Obama DoJ used it in their defense of DOMA.
Last time I checked the old testament from whence most of the crazy shit comes from, polygamy was NEVER condemned and an purely heterosexual phenomenon, still is. Mormon Warren Jeff’s recent court case is evidence enough. Good luck with the pedophilia nonsense. Let’s hope the APA goes after them.
What’s most interesting about Matt Barber attacking B4U-ACT is that B4U’s aim is to prevent pedophilia, hence the name “before you act”.
He kinda left that part out…
Oh, I wouldn’t go that far…
But when a psychology researcher says ‘people’, what they really mean is educated, mostly white members of the middle and upper middle classes between ages of seventeen and twenty-three in desperate need of beer money. The psychology department of my alma mater bought me a *LOT* of beer.
If you’d like to explain how your poorly-reasoned hypos are different from otherwise identical hypos involving mixed-gender couples, we might have a discussion. As it is, I recommend you go back to smoking old Anita Bryant books and leave us decent people alone.
And the picture of Keith Abelow that accompanied this article on RSS reminded me of the male half of the couple that hit on me at a swing club by telling me that I looked just like their son.
There is a great online article online about this issue: Facts About Homosexuality and Child Molestation
So we accept that only those who have reached the magic age of 18 (or 16, or 17…) can offer informed consent? Okay, if it’s politically convenient. I say Teh Gay is throwing pedophiles under the school bus as it careens down a slippery slope. Which they have every right to do, of course.
There’s a huge difference in development between fourteen and eighteen. That’s why fourteen year-olds aren’t allowed to vote, sign contracts, or own property. You can “say” whatever you want. That doesn’t make you right and you don’t get to pretend to be a victim when people object to the spread of bigoted falsehoods.