I know that psychology has an element of fortune telling, but I still think I can draw some possible conclusions from this..
These days, the fear of pedophiles is blown all out of proportion. Reason magazine covered this a few months ago.
You can be put on the sex offender registry for urinating in public, having consensual sex as a teenager or even for “sexting.” And in California, once you are on the list, you are on it for life.
And here's a BBC cartoon mocking the hysteria.
The Stereotype
The stereotypical pedophile is an outsider to the family. He is manifested in two forms: the man in the trenchcoat who must satisfy his impulses; and the cunning, smiling assassin who gradually brainwashes children and spoils them with free gifts in order to win their confidence. The smiling assassin is far more productive, and has evolved from a barbaric predator into a professional con-artist.
The state is manifested in two forms: the dictator in khaki who must satisfy his impulses; and the cunning, smiling assassin who brainwashes citizens and spoils them with free gifts in order to win their confidence. The smiling assassin is far more productive, and has evolved from a barbaric predator into a professional con-artist.
The State as Family
Stefan Molyneux explains the state-as-family paradigm in this video: people subconsciously project their parents onto the state and vice versa. For example, the Founding Fathers, Uncle Sam, Brothers in Arms, the Motherland in Russia, the Fatherland in Germany, "like it or leave it" = "my house, my rules", etc.
Under the state-as-family paradigm, citizens = children. Is pedophile hysteria induced by a fear of being groomed and preyed upon by the state? It is worth noting that virtually nobody trusts any government. We know this because virtually nobody trusts any politician, and the government is not a bunch of buildings - it is a bunch of politicians. This mistrust occurs because people instinctively know that politicians (the government) brainwash and prey upon them. If the human race does not have a corresponding fear that responds to this instinct, it would probably be extinct by now.
All fears must have an outlet, including those that are subconscious. But as we know, people experience Stockholm Syndrome: they have a defensive aversion to anything that contradicts their opinion of the state (and their opinion of their own parents). Likewise, when people are confronted with the possibility of their state abusing its position of power, they also react defensively - against the implied proposition that their parents abused their position of power. But like any fear, a fear of the state cannot be averted; it can only be controlled. If the state-family has clean hands, the mind must identify a scapegoat in order to subjugate its fear.
The Connection
"Pedophiles" are most definitely outsiders to the family. They infiltrate their way in with a "charismatic" nature, and slowly but surely propagandize the children while getting them dependent on handouts. The moment the pedophile has obtained the child's trust (i.e. gets elected), the relationship instantaneously becomes of a parasitic nature. What is bizarre is that nobody in the victimologist industry is willing to explain how "grooming" could have such a drastic effect in the space of a few months, and whether or not the child exhibits symptoms of Stockholm Syndrome.
For example, the Founding Fathers, Uncle Sam, Brothers in Arms, the Motherland in Russia, the Fatherland in Germany, "like it or leave it" = "my house, my rules", etc.
Well, how effective would it be as: the Founding Politicians, Draft Sam, Special Interests in Arms, Povertyland in Russia, Crowdedland in Germany, etc.
It is worth noting that virtually nobody trusts any government.
Surveys say otherwise.
Surveys say that nobody trusts politicians, and since everything the government does is derived from the command of some politician, theoretically nobody should trust the government. I'm talking about things at subconscious level here.
Feel free to link to such a survey.
Ditch psychologisms and crank non psychologists who psychologize incessantly on the internet mixing it with science and politics while bearing little burdens to those whom they affect...such as people like Stephan Molyneaux.
This is not a clinical health forum, there is no need for psychoanalysis or pseudo-psychoanalytic symbolism - and if there was people should be seeing professional psychologists to treat their illness - not internet gurus
"As in a kaleidoscope, the constellation of forces operating in the system as a whole is ever changing." - Ludwig Lachmann
"When A Man Dies A World Goes Out of Existence" - GLS Shackle
You realize that Molyneux's wife is a professional psychologist, right? She was involved in his program briefly. I wouldn't rely on that argument...
For what it's worth, and because this thread is relevant to my interests:
• I've never encountered anyone willing to say that as a principle, they trust politicians until they give them a reason not to. I also agree nobody trusts politicians, a simple test is when you bring up to military people the fact that they "serve" politicians, they will avoid acknowledging that like the plague. They know that nobody respects the title "politician", which they know instinctively (nothing they "know" is ever based in objective fact in my experience).
• I dont think people instinctively mistrust or despise pedophiles. I would argue that pedophilia is manifestly natural and prevalent which is why the government can capitalize on making it illegal in the first place.
Are pedophiles really outsiders to the family? I thought children were more likely to be molested by a family member than a stranger.
Are pedophiles really outsiders to the family? I thought children were more likely to be molested by a family member than a stranger. In case this turns into an extended discussion, I should point out as early as possible the distinction between molestation and pedophilia. All people who molest their younger family are pedophiles, but not all pedophiles are molestors.
Politicians Least Trusted Profession in UK, According to Survey.
Because many people view HMO managers as lying crooks, they tend to fear their insurance company and apprehensively read the terms and conditions of their contract. But even though many people view politicians as lying crooks, they blindly admire whatever "terms and conditions" the police impose upon them. But humans have not evolved to both admire and fear the same set of environmental circumstances, let alone replace fear with admiration.
I'm opposed to the victimologist charades that Molyneux entertains on behalf of his wife. However, it is still possible to analyze the surface layer of people's thought processes. Otherwise many marketing managers and advertising specialists would be out of a job right now. The fact that state propaganda explicitly references the family, shows that we should also examine hidden psychological drivers.
Politics is driven by people's emotions; if we don't understand the root causes of these emotions, we won't get very far. Liberty is a product to be marketed, not merely an intellectual exercise. There's a reason why cigarettes are displayed behind the counter, and why some men buy oversized pick-up trucks. We should learn from market forces and not try to swim upstream. E.g. at least be careful when using the repulsive "taxes are theft" argument against the emotional tidal wave of state support. It's like saying to the owner of an oversized pick-up truck, "Why do you feel the need to make up for the size of your weaner? Just sell that thing to a scrapmetal dealer and use the proceeds to buy a Toyota Prius."
"According to Jenkins, and other constructionist historians, child molestation panics of the twentieth century have occurred around the 1910s, 1940s, and 1980s." (pg6)
The 1910s and 1940s were periods of extensive government intervention, whereas the 1980s was a period of extensive privatization and deregulation. Radical changes to the role of the state have coincided with child molestation panics.
Here, I will risk nibbling on a fortune cookie.. What could be more emotionally resonant of the power imbalance between the state and citizens, than the power imbalance between adults and children? In mainstream culture, the only adults who prey on children are sexual deviants. So what could be more emotionally resonant of the state abusing its position of power over citizens, than so-called pedophiles abusing their position of power over children? If people have an instinctive fear of the state, the probable outlet of this fear is child molestation panics.
Suppose libertarians began making a big song and dance about the state in a way that explicitly references victimologist mantras:
By covertly attacking the state as a child sexual predator, libertarians can act as the catalysts for a hysteria in which the fear of pedophiles becomes instinctive and the fear of the state becomes overt.
Another round.
“A big portion of these pedophiles will pick a family that is distressed,” Dr. Phil says. “They’ll pick someone who’s underfunded, maybe both parents are working or it’s a single mother, there may be illness in the family and the kids are kind of being pushed to the side and being neglected. So we have this savior that comes in and says, ‘Hey, let me help out’… What this tells you is those who seem to be helping the most, those who maybe seem to be the most kind, the most giving, the most willing, the most helpful and available, are the very ones you need to audit the most.” He adds, “Pay attention if there’s somebody who knows too much about what your children are into.”
What Dr.Phil is really saying:
"The state will pick a social group that is distressed," Dr Who says. "It will a pick a group that is underfunded, single-mothers, the sick, minorities, etc. So we have this savior that comes in and says, 'Hey, let me help out'... What this tells you is those who seem to be helping the most, those who maybe seem to be the most kind, the most giving, the most willing, the most helpful and available, are the very ones you need to audit the most.” He adds, “Pay attention if the state knows too much about what you're into.”
It's easy to compile endless phrases like these by Googling for victimologist drabble: "pedophile" + "grooming".
Good point, I was thinking sloppily.
My last post was @ vive.
The major social programs were enacted in 1933 and 1965. Where were pedos then?
Extra points for trying to make a serious response.
@OP: No.
Pedo-craze is like any other craze - alcohol craze, marijuana craze, crack craze, terror craze - and it serves the interests of the State like any other craze.
And no, pedophilia is not primarily committed by blood relatives, it's committed by in-laws and step-family which braindead government statistics simply report as "family".
Clayton -
A conspiracy theory about conspiracies.
I think we're making progress here.
So Prohibition, the war on Drugs and the war on Terror are "conspiracy theories"?? And they are level-headed, sane policies that reflect the best interests of society, and not the interests of the government's police organs??
They certainly are driven by pharma and police to some degree. But pedophilia isn't. There's no market there.
Yeah, tell that to these kids. Prohibiting something drives up the price.
I think I come across in this thread as a total wack job. Maybe this is a better way to put it:
I think I come across in this thread as a total wack job
Rather than digging yourself a deeper hole, why not stop while you're ahead?