Currently I am having a bit of a miscommunication with a fellow advocate, Robbyn Peters Bennett. She often is known among anti-children's rights groups as a hater of pedophiles. The whole point of this post is to prove one point. I agree with her, with her being the reader to disprove. My idea of pedophile advocacy is very different than hers by way of being the same as hers, in a more optimistic way. I am an optimist on this issue, on the surface level communication, even when pointing out how lucky I am to have what I have in terms of support.
Robbyn Peters Bennett, as as entity, is like an iceberg, in a different way than one might think. Many don't get to the bottom, then she throws you out because "you've seen right and will exploit it". Ms. Bennett is an anti-pedophile researcher, in word format, meaning she hates when pedophiles use that word as an excuse for abuse, which doesn't happen in a judicial context, so mainly we're talking sexual abusers being falsely dubbed "pedophiles", but in a more hidden way.
Why doesn't she share this view? Political correctness. I can imagine how she would be on this issue in real life. "We have all these pedophiles at VirPed, and we can't help them. We don't know what to do." sitting on a deckchair with, perhaps friends, family, or fellow advocates. That means you care, right? The rest of them remember a time when your focus wasn't compassion, and that's why they hate you. Robbyn, at the tip of the iceberg, is a core-level anti-spanking advocate, and that's the first impression I'll always imprint onto her.
However, what is in between the bottom and tippy top of the iceberg? Anger. I label it "anti-abuser" anger instead. The question in this whole community, represented by her, is "why aren't they coming here. We know the good ones exist, and now nobody believes us, so why aren't they coming here?" The reason, I've deduced, is the blockade and the pro-spanking forces behind it attaching that connotation to us.
I see the children's rights debate very differently that most people, and not really centered on pedophiles and pedophilia. Battle of the age groups, with only one side winning - adults. Children on one side, adults on the other, keeping children down like a compress, and abusing them in their homes like battered women using parents an abusers' excuse and glorified title. A sexual abuser is simply a shocking, commonplace attachment to that keychain.
Where are pedophiles, meaning individuals with a clinical condition, in that battle? One of the first to lay down their arms as outliers to this community. They have chosen to give children their rights, as one of the first groups of people to choose to strive to treat children with respect. I do believe, with my experience with strength of impulses, that the study that 3 out of 4 pedophiles do not abuse children is about accurate. Most sexual abusers are not pedophiles, but simply sexually entitled adults/peacekeepers who target teenage girls in particular, and those living within their own home.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Any comment that
1. Endorses child abuse (including pornography of such)
2. Imposes want to the point of imposition, meaning entitlement.
3. Contains self-entitled parent rhetoric, to the point of self-victimization
will not be published. Flexible application. Debate is allowed, but only civil arguments that presume the best of intentions in their opponent, on both sides.