DONT KILL ME YOU GUYS... IT'S LONG BUT INTERESTING. SMARTT CAME TO MIND FIRST THINKING YOU MAY ENJOYING READING THIS BIT OF INFO...
Bisexual Britni Writes (And Writes And Writes):I know this is going to be one of the more controversial topics on which I write. The camps on this subject are separated by gaping chasms that are, by all rights, insurmountable. When you read this paper, please bear in mind that this is a position paper and not an endorsement of sexually aggressing children or harming them in anyway whatsoever. Having two children of my own, topics concerning children, especially the protection of children, are very near and dear to me. If you feel yourself getting mad or feeling like I am advocating sexually abusing children, remember what Benjamin Franklin once said. "I have never been bitten by the word dog on a piece of paper."
At times, I feel human beings have forgotten that they are, by all rights, an animal. No different, chemically or biologically then any other animal on this planet. We experience all the same emotions and are susceptible to the same diseases and traumas. In addition to the fact that we are indeed animals, we have so inflated and expanded, artificially, our life span that we now have a hard time determining when in our lives, certain events are considered proper. Sex and marriage being two instances that sit right on top of that list.
When we go back hundreds or thousands of years we realize immediately that the human animal did not live to such grand ages of 70, 80 or even 90. They were lucky to make it out of their teens and people in their 30's were considered elderly. Even during Shakespearean times, girls not married and pregnant by 13 were considered "old maids" or "spinsters" who were likely to live at home until their deaths. During this period of time, would being attracted to, sexually, or even having sex with an 11 or 12 year old girl been considered a sickness? Absolutely not. It was simply the way things were. Due to the limited life span of the human animal at the time, not only was it acceptable and expected to have sex with such young girls, it was demanded of us by mother nature herself.
When we strip the human being to it's basic elements, it's nuts and bold so to say, we get this: An extremely violent, to the point of being vicious, animal. The human has solved every problem in it's history and continues to solve any major problem it encounters, with violence. Violence put us on top of the food chain and keeps us there. We can cover it up, hide it, call it a different name, it is still basic, plain, violence. It is a very natural tendency that we all succumb to displaying or participating in at some point in our lives. Children start displaying it as early as 8 months old. I have identical twin boys, age 16 months. Neither have any qualm about biting, hitting, punching or attacking the other, at anytime, for a mere toy or some affection. Children on school grounds go to fists over extremely minor altercations and are capable of really hurting one another without even really knowing why they are doing it.
Children come out with all the raw, natural tendencies, instincts and drives that the human being has always been equipped with. Then, it is the job of society to basically beat those natural drives out of the children via conditioning. Adding a so called "veneer" of civilization to that child. Of course, this is only a veneer, and we, at times, make the grand mistake of forgetting that. We have merely trained an ape to bring us coffee, we have not destroyed the apes natural desire for violence, control, food and sex. This control training takes with some better then others. By the time a child is 10 years old, it cannot so much as go the bathroom without asking permission first. The control has set in and they are on their way to being good little mind controlled, tools of the state. Of course, this is NOT what nature intended for them to be.
I have heard it said that Human Beings have two "states of being". Either they are at war or preparing for war. Even in this age of so called enlightenment, we see all our education and technology have really brought us, are more efficient ways to kill one another. The violence is this world is not getting better, it is getting worse as the Human Being becomes more and more efficient at killing. In addition, if you track what the Human Being has built, invented or created in the last 5000 years, you will see that 99.999 percent of it was designed while humans were at war, for the purpose of war. Up to and including the splitting of the atom. The natural genius the human displays for war and killing sort of betrays what the Human Being is designed for and does best. The flip side of the war and destruction treatise, is the medical aspect of war. Almost every major medical advancement the Human Being has made, has been a direct result of the necessity of the battlefield. Life saving drugs, pain killers, transplants and grafting are all gifts of war.
If you want to decide what is natural and what is control training, you need only look across the wide spectrum of human actions. You have to look straight through societal differences and race/origin barriers. Is violence is normal course of every single society in the world? Is there any group of people who never experience or resort to violence in either personal matters or matters of the state? Empirically, that would be called a test group and a control group, the absolute basis of the scientific method. Of course, we all know the answer to the question. Violence is not only present but rampant in every single culture, people and location in the world.
I think at this point on our history, anyone who says that violence is not a natural tendency has simply not been paying attention to reality and paying too much attention in Sunday School. Violence as much part of the Human Being as it's eyes and ears. You cannot separate violence from the human being, no matter how much counseling and control training you force a person to undergo. You will have as much luck ending the violent tendencies and ideas of the human as you would stopping him or him from feeling hungry after they have been deprived of food for days. It is a pipe dream and people had better learn to deal with and work around it. All this, "can't we just get along" crap is just that, crap. The Middle east is not going to get better, it is going to get worse. Those differences will not be solved by any other means then the way situations like that have always been solved by Human Beings, direct and brutal violence. Face it and get used to the idea.
Now, with all that behind us, absorbed and understood. The question still remains: Is violence right or wrong? The answer? It is neither. Violence just is. At times it us used altruistically and other times used criminally. Violence, because it is simply natural, is neutral. Sort of like a medical procedure. The same procedure can be good or bad, depending on who it is performed on and why. You can hate what I am saying due to personal feelings or experiences but what is, just is. Violence is as much a part of you and I as our hearts.
Of course, now we have to explore the use of the word "sick" as it applies to people who are more willing then others to be violent. The very word sick implies something is wrong. Is a person who simply acts more upon their natural desires and tendencies, truly sick? Do we call a lion "sick" when it kills and eats the young of another lion that was killed or for some reason or another, is no longer in control of the pride? We call it "nature at work". Of course, as we all know, hundreds of times a year, we hear about some little boy or girl who is missing and the Mother and Stepfather are begging for it's return. There is always an elaborate "kidnapped" routine we all have to listen to, only to find out the Stepfather killed the child in a jealous rage. We have gotten so used to it, before the newscast even ends, we all look at the Stepfather and say, "he did it." When the lion does it, its natural, when thousands of Stepfathers do it, it becomes a sickness. Can a natural drive truly be a sickness? It is an interesting debate that there is simply no right or wrong answer to. When a man shoots another man for money, property of over a woman, we say the violent act was a depraved act resulting from a mental instability or sickness. When they kill considerably more people while wearing a uniform and fighting a war, the act is heroic and commendable. Since the same act is right or wrong depending on the situation, that makes the definition of right and wrong purely SUBJECTIVE. Subjective evidence and/or proofs are always thrown out of empirical experiments.
Now that we have laid some groundwork for human animal in it's natural state, let us look at another natural state no one wants to really deal with. As I discussed earlier, the current life span of the Human Being is radically, artificially elongated. This life span is a product of modern medicine and is, at best, a few hundred years old. Taking into account that the Homo Sapiens has been walking around for hundreds of thousands of years, possibly millions, this lengthy life span is nothing but a minor fraction of a one percent of our total existence. So, for hundreds of thousands of years, the female ages 11-13 was prime breeding material. So much so, that her body is completely ready to conceive, carry and bear children by said ages. Sex with so called children of 11-13 was both commonplace and a natural act carried out time and time again.
Of course, now if a man so much as looks "incorrectly" at a girl that was, not long ago, prime breeding stock, he is considered twisted, sick and is likely locked away for years. His genetic coding, written over thousands and thousands of years, is now considered a crime. Of course, as we all know, things to do change. Evolution does take place and certainly there is no genetic/evolutionary necessity for 11-13 year old to bear children anymore. Evolution, however, takes almost as many years to undo a genetic coding as it took to write the code in the first place. The last 200 years or so, young girls have been a poor sexual choice, the last 80 years, they have been downright criminal. That means, we have asked people to forgo natural drive via genetics, in only a few generations. Of course, we all know this is impossible and cannot be done, no matter the evolutionary topic.
The veneer of civilization requires all males to say, they are only sexually attracted to girls 18 years old and up. Of course, we all know that is a huge lie. You can watch men in the mall, on a daily basis stare and ogle girls barely into puberty. Some are willing to admit it, some are not. Fearing the thought police will come haul them away and lock them in an asylum. Of course, the rampant production, trading and acquisition of child porn is sort of the guide/sign post that evolution has yet to make early nubile girls uninteresting to the male population. Continual incest, sexual assault, rape (statutory) and other like crimes perpetrated on young girls is on the rise, not the decline. One in three women were molested/violated in one form or another as children and young teens. Think about those numbers. One in three. Divide that into 145 million women in this country and you decide if it is a natural occurrence. Once again, natural not necessarily being "right" or "good".
Now, keep in mind that these acts still happen even though the penalties for sexually exploiting a child are DRACONIAN. Remember, we do not write laws to prevent ourselves from doing something, we write laws to stop others from doing things to us. With that in mind, even in today's educated environment, what would be the sex with young girls rate if there were no penalties whatsoever? Bordering 100 percent?
Is it really proper to call a pedophile, sick? Just as with violence, can you refer to a natural state of anything, deviant? It may be undesirable, but deviant? It may even be criminal, but is it truly deviant? The discipline of "Evolutionary Psychology" would agree that a pedophile is a very normal mentality. I reach this conclusion about Evolutionary Psychology after referencing a great deal of material, but most notably an article written by N.S. Aristoff, dated 9/101995. The paper was titled, "Attraction to Young Girls- Evolution Not Perversion." The author supports and agrees with almost every one of my conclusions/arguments that I have listed here.
This is a sexual topic and it involves children. Most of us have been extremely programmed in this category and will immediately rebel, without really knowing why, at the mere idea a pedophile is not a deviant sicko, just someone who did not accept the veneer of programming we call civilization. Or more likely yet, simply a person who cannot control the fact they are sexually attracted to young girls as well as others can.
I need to now clarify my position before I get a thousand death threats and hate emails. Please remember I am talking about what is natural, not what is right or wrong. Pedophilia is a natural act/desire, that does not make it appropriate or right. No more then murder is right, even if killing is a natural drive. What I am saying is quite the opposite of pedophilia being right. If someone molested my children using their natural sex drive, I would likely call on my natural maternal/violence drive and dispatch the problem with prejudice. If anything, I am offering a warning to people who think pedophilia is some sort of disease that can be cured or treated with some counseling and a little jail time.
A pedophile who acts upon his natural urges to have sex with young girls, is way beyond counseling. You are not trying to treat a disease with a cure, you are trying to undo hundreds of thousands of years of genetic programming. You will not succeed in killing this man's drive for young girls any better then you could counsel him out of wanting water when he is thirsty. There is a reason that the recidivism rate amongst sex crimes perpetrated on children is higher then any other crime. Failing to realize and/or admit that a pedophile is the natural state of the human and that this fake, civilized "I only have sex with girls 18 or older" is really the deviant lie, opens our daughters to be predated. We play games with counseling and making ourselves feel better by turning pedophiles loose on the streets calling them, "cured", when all we have done is turn the wolves loose in the hen house. They ARE NOT cured. They NEVER WILL BE cured. Why? Because there is no cure ! for a natural state of being. There is no cure for our tendency towards violence and there is no cure for the drive to have sex with young girls. Both topics need to be accepted before we can work towards prevention. As always, we have a stronger chance of curtailing sex crimes perpetrated on children if we function with "what is" and not "what we want things to be."
What do we don about pedophiles once they are discovered, knowing they cannot be reprogrammed? Minds greater than mine will have to ponder that one. I am not sure there is an answer that applies to all cases.
As always, trying to elucidate, enlighten and educate,
Bisexual Britni
Previous Topic
Index
