How ‘Kinds’ Will Groom Society
I want to share with you the most disturbing thing I have read in a very long time. You need to know about it.
I learned about it via the Twitter feed of a UK radical feminist. In Britain, radical feminists, including TERFs (Trans-Exclusive Radical Feminists) are taking an insane amount of abuse from transgenders and their allies. But on that issue, they’re right. This particular feminist has uncovered something shocking — beyond shocking — about how pedophiles intend to use the same strategy that worked, and is working, for LGBTs, for the sake of legitimizing pederasty. Look:
I decided to take this out of my replies to some tweets and do a thread because this ‘Paedophile Manifesto’ is so chilling it needs its own analysis and exposure. I’m only half way through as it is just making me so angry.
— Dr EM (@PankhurstEM) May 1, 2018
You can read the entire so-called “Pedophile Manifesto” at this link. There are no images, but I would be careful about this at work. I am going to quote from it liberally below. The writer calls pedophiles “kinds” (from the German word for “child,” as in “kindergarten”). It’s actually a reasonable strategy document — “reasonable” in the narrow and amoral sense of it makes sense as a strategy to get society to accept something totally evil. We know that this can work because it has worked with other sexual minorities.
Here are some excerpts, starting with the introduction:
After The Fall: A Beginner’s Guide to Destroying Pedophobia in the 21st Century
Wherever you are reading this, I suggest you save, copy, or make backups because this paper might not be there for long. This work is protected by the First Amendment, and that’s a blessing. Our long tradition of free speech allows us to present some of the most unfathomable and disagreeable ideas to the public without fear. How else would society move forward if highly unpopular ideas weren’t available for open debate? I fully expect this essay to be vilified. It will be treated the same way abolitionist literature was treated in the 18th century, calls for women’s’ suffrage in the 19th and gay literature in the early 20th. It will be labelled obscene, outrageous, beyond-the-pale. But I ask all those reading to keep an open mind, even if it is currently filled with murderous rampage. This essay is not meant for every audience. It is specifically tailored as a bill of assistance to America’s most hated sexual minority- teens and adults attracted to children. We present this manuscript as a complete plan for total legal, social, and political equity within a short time frame. Because reality has a progressive bias, your triumph is inevitable. Victory is assured.
Recent victories for gay rights have left many celebrating and some shocked. How did the movement advance so far in such a short period of time? The truth is, it wasn’t magic. People didn’t just “naturally” change their minds on the issue. It took years of effort by activists, peer pressure and effective social advertising techniques. All of these were laid out in a game plan co-written by Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen entitled “After the Ball: How America Will Conquer It’s Fear and Hatred of Gays in the ’90’s.
At the time this book was written, gays had won a few victories yet weren’t gaining much ground.
Well-reasoned arguments and friendly chats with neighbors weren’t cutting it. The social stigma against homosexuality was almost as strong as the one against pedosexuality today. Since then, LGBT activists and organizations have been following this playbook to the letter, rapidly gained increasing acceptance and recently won a Supreme Court victory ensuring their right to love. As stated, the purpose of this article is to adapt those same winning strategies. Keyword here: Adapt. Your situation and theirs, despite surface similarities is not exactly the same. Some strategies they used will not work for you, and not everything they did was smart. Learn from their mistakes and achieve equality even faster.
Take it from a former pedophobe who saw the light- this is war. There are those who will gladly do much worse than kill you for what you believe in. Before I actually researched the issue, I felt the same way. Now I only feel sympathy and want to help. If you don’t treat this as an all-out fight for survival, for acceptance, for the right to be love and be loved- then you are doomed to failure. If you are not willing to face struggle and rejection, screaming and even pure silence from family, you need to stop reading and close the tab immediately.
You already know what you desire isn’t harmful or unnatural, only a more perfect and virtuous union. You understand that legality has never dictated morality. When slavery was legal it was still immoral and while marijuana is illegal it shouldn’t be. This is not about the morality of the issue. It isn’t just about you or what you believe. It’s about the millions of men, women and children constantly living in fear because they know that if they were discovered they would be lose their jobs, be beaten, jailed or worse. You will face hardship. You will have to step on a few toes. But some guy named Benjamin Franklin once said
-“Those who sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither”.
We know what has to be done. Now it’s only a matter of doing it.
Toxic ideas and bigotry permeate our society, turning right into wrong and poisoning childrens’ minds with hate. Still, there are those who selfishly place their own wants over the needs of others. Stability should never come before equality.
How to achieve this goal? Use emotivism and the media:
In truth, access to the media is what you need most. Without the help of liberal and progressive Hollywood, there will be no campaign. It’s a chicken and egg problem. While they may deny it, most are just waiting for the social climate to improve before taking the “risk” of giving you positive representation. At the same time, more representation necessarily improves the social climate for LGBTPs. The proliferation of kind relationships on television, corporate sponsorships, sympathetic ad- campaigns and social media marches are the secret weapon that will truly turn the tide. We propose the beginning of a targeted media – information campaign to educate the public and transform their social mores. Culture must be modernized and brought out of the dark ages to make room for love. We will reverse-engineer the weapons of hate they deploy against you to turn their bigotry into admiration before your very eyes.
We will not hide the fact that this is a feels-based advertising campaign. You cannot use logic to reason someone out of an emotional belief, only more emotion. Prejudice is not rational- it’s a “gut feeling”. Poignant pleas for understanding will fall on deaf ears. Some of the most hateful among us will never change and must instead be isolated from polite society. Arguments from emotion cannot be falsified in the same way rational arguments can, and although we have both emotional arguments are more effective.
Things are different than they were in 1980. We are the media. Using the internet, we have access to millions of minds in the making. In the beginning it will fall on you to create the positive portrayals and PSAs you seek, then release them on sites like Youtube. Nobody will do it for you. We need to cultivate an army of keyboard warriors who will go into battle on the comments sections of news articles and other spaces where kind issues are being discussed. Their mission is to discredit pedophobia and the war on child sexuality.
The basis of the campaign is to advance what the writer calls “sex-positivity.” It starts with the destigmatization of shame. And then it moves towards more advance forms of desensitization:
We mustn’t shock and repel the public with the mental imagery of kind sex in the beginning of our campaign. Instead, wherever possible pedosexuality must be reduced to an abstract question and vague feelings of “love” “kindness” and “nurturing”. In the beginning, we can’t expect americans to think of being kind as a good thing, much less for them to understand, affirm or appreciate it. Indifference is still a step up from intolerance. Our objectives are threefold:
> Desensitization: Dull the public’s sense of panic and fear whenever the subject of children and sexuality comes up. The principle behind this is clear: Any behavior becomes more acceptable the more people talk about it or see their friends talking about it. This is accomplished by a large groundswell of open and furtive talk about pedosexuality in a neutral or positive way. Discussing the subject and rejecting the false consensus (all sex is rape) makes it appear that a large portion of society is willing to debate or even has these feelings themselves. A chain reaction occurs where more and more people come out. Bring up your sexual orientation as much as possible in a humorous manner to break the ice. A popular joke could be “I’m offensive and I find this pedosexual.”
Discussion moves an idea from “unthinkable” to “controversial” in the Overton Window, and that’s one step towards “normal”.
Where you talk is important. Internet comments sections are helpful, but they aren’t places to have a true debate. Those are places to spread information, gather screenshots and make fun of the opposition. Better places to speak include local newspapers, magazines and television. While you won’t be able to openly support pedosexuality at first, you can support sex-positive and pro-nudity initiatives in your area. Or just go straight for the big guns and come out if you’re ballsy.
The main point is to talk about kindness until the issue becomes thoroughly exhausting. People should come to view being kind the same way they do liking a certain flavor of ice cream. The process of desensitization can be sped up by making comments which allude to the matter being settled when someone very emotive appears.
“Dude, why do you care so much? It’s just sex”.
(In response to “children can’t consent”) “I’m so tired of this stupid myth still being spread around (link to a better source or explanation).”
“You’re behind the times. Nobody cares anymore.”
Never go alone during desensitization efforts. Always bring backup. There’s nothing worse than being the only person in a comments section battling against hordes of bigots. If you see someone trying to fight ignorance online, don’t just stand there, help them out!
Desensitization is important in real life too. You have to come out and be completely normal. If you live among straights in peace, while they may find you annoying they will eventually get used to you. Flooding culture in a wave of kind-positive advertising and media inevitably leads to changes in social values. This advertising has to be presented in the least offensive way possible (no jokes about sex!)
The writer then advises “Jamming” — coming at pedophobes relentlessly with strategies to isolate them and stigmatize them.
> Jamming: We want to shut down the thought process which leads to pedophobic remarks in the first place. Most of us know that people make those tough guy statements for a quick shot of self-righteousness or social approval. “Jamming” implies the addition of a second, mutually exclusive emotion: Guilt. Most people feel shame when they make a lame joke or say something deemed socially unacceptable. With enough jamming, the pedophobe’s mental state can be worn down to meager acceptance.
Here is an outline of his strategies to make pedophilia socially acceptable:
The main difference between us and gays is that gay behavior was mostly legal when they started. There’s no point in trying to change the law when society hasn’t changed with you. We must first change society, then we will be able to change the law. In that regard, our fight is much more like the fight for marijuana legalization than gay marriage.
There are five sub-strategies which can be used when it comes to social acceptance.
> COME OUT
> Portray “kinds” as victims, not as aggressive challengers.
>Give potential protectors (“allies”) a just cause.
>Make “kinds” look good.
>Make dissenters look bad.
The document discusses each of these in greater detail. For example:
>Portray kinds as victims:
Kinds must be portrayed as victims of nature, not people who willingly choose their attraction. Who would actually choose to be part of the world’s most hated group anyway? As far as you know, you were born kind and cannot change it. Efforts at “therapy” must be considered harmful and damaging to your identity. Frequently compare it to bleaching blacks or reformation camps. Currently the social orthodoxy is “get them the help they need before they hurt anyone”. You must change this to “thinking they need help is offensive because they aren’t hurting anyone.” By appearing as victims, the majority is instinctively inclined to protect and defend.
> Give allies just cause.
Recognize that you aren’t getting anywhere without allies. Parents, Straight Adults and even children themselves need to speak out in support before more people decide to join the fight. You need a “just cause”, and in your case plain legal equality leaves too much to be desired since children can never have all the legal rights of an adult. A just cause answers the question “I’m not one of you, so why should I care?”
Our causes are sex positivity, anti-ageism, bodily autonomy and the right to privacy. The government shouldn’t have the authority to tell people what they can and can’t do inside the bedroom or dictate how parents must raise their children. If no physical or emotional harm is being done, there is no excuse to ban an activity.
You also have an excellent just cause in religious liberty; childhood innocence and the harmfulness of sex are religious beliefs you shouldn’t be forced to believe. Morality should never be backed by legislation.
Does this sound familiar? It should:
> Make pedophobes look bad.
At a later stage of the media campaign for kind rights-long after other ads have become commonplace-it’ll be time to get tough with remaining pedo-bashers. To be blunt, they must be vilified and publicly shamed. (This is important because at that point, the opposition will have massively ramped up it’s disinformation campaign.) Our goal here is twofold. First, we seek to replace the mainstream’s self-righteous pride about its pedophobia with shame and guilt. Second, we intend to make the anti-sex bigots look so nasty that average Americans will want to dissociate themselves from such types.
The public should be shown images of ranting pedophobes whose secondary traits and beliefs disgust middle America. These images might include: the Ku Klux Klan demanding that kinds be burned alive or castrated; bigoted southern ministers drooling with hysterical hatred to a degree that looks both comical and deranged; menacing punks, thugs, and convicts speaking coolly about the “pedos” they have killed or would like to kill; a tour of Nazi concentration camps where kinds were tortured and gassed.
A campaign to vilify the victimizers is going to enrage our most fervid enemies, of course. But what else can we say? The shoe fits, and we should make them try it on for size, with all of America watching.
And don’t forget this proven tactic:
>>Strategies For Acceptance: Education
“Teaching Tolerance” and getting in schools is absolutely essential to deprogramming the next generation. Obviously this can’t happen until late in the game, but a good way to get a foot in the door is creating support groups for minor-attracted teens and their allies. We can make resources available to educators and parents who want to raise children in a less hateful manner. An effective tactic may be convincing children themselves to bring up the topic at home and in classroom discussions.
Direct marketing to teachers and principals means distributing resources which explain child sexuality, implore them to act responsibly, “fight discrimination” and self-evaluate. Education means using all our media channels to debunk myths about kind people and defend them. GLSEN has numerous resources you can check out for inspiration.
This one is critically important:
>>Strategies For Acceptance: Linguistic
He who controls language controls the debate. Why do you think transpeople insist you use their preferred pronouns? It’s not just semantics, the words you use are *vitally* important and the pedophobe knows this, which is why she often screams about “rape”, “predators” “abuse”, “molestation” and “exploitation” in situations which obviously don’t warrant such terms. Even sneakier is the use of the words “victim” and “survivor”, which imply that most children die from sex.
Call out these verbally violent attacks and shut them down before they get off the ground. They are entirely baseless and offensive- plus they cross the line into hate speech done with intent to defame and attack a minority. Especially when the term “predator” is used, you can joke that kinds want to eat children for dinner and gobble them up. Getting everyone laughing at how ridiculous these people sound will help immeasurably. The only way to do that is through satirical video.
Luckily, we have some “power words” we can use for ourselves.
“Kind” is the most important one, because it has positive connotations while “pedoph***” does not. This is the main reason why gays pushed so hard for people to start using “gay” instead of homosexual, and we need to push even harder. P*do or any of it’s variations must be treated as a slur.
“Pedosexual” is the second most important powerword. Once people get over it’s initial novelty it will cement the fact that pedosexuality is an inborn orientation and cannot change.
“Childhood sexual freedom” is an alternative way of framing the debate, and one that will lead to more success. Instead of looking it at from the perspective of the adult, view things from a child’s perspective. You can then attack pedophobic logic as “ageist” and make fun of bigots for claiming children are too stupid to understand their own bodies. The genius of this approach is that it turns pedophobia into an attack on children’s intelligence, not kinds- which is closer to the word’s original meaning anyway. “Scared of what children are capable of, are you?” “You aren’t the one who gets to make that choice. It’s not your body..”
Here’s how they intend to go after LGBTs and radical feminists who oppose them:
The two groups we need to worry most about are the LGBT community and the religious right. The strategy to deal with each is the same: Internal co-option and blurring the lines.
The first may sound strange, but don’t expect much initial sympathy from LGBTs and SJWs. If you were put in their shoes and constantly had to defend against being “pedo-sympathisers” you would understand. As a self-defense mechanism, most gay people have a kneejerk negative reaction against being compared to or lumped in with kinds. While we understand their misgivings, they’re still no excuse for bigotry. Here’s how we change this:
Constantly remind them that, until the early 1980s the pedo acceptance and LGBT movements were one and the same. Pedo supporters were only thrown under the bus because of politics, not morals. The early LGBTs believed they had a better chance at social acceptance if they renounced pedophilia, and only a few years ago they were debating dropping the “T” from the lgbt acronym (doing the same thing they did with children’s rights advocates to transsexuals). Until Kaitlyn Jenner came along, that is. Isolate Kind-hating gays by portraying them as wealthy, white hypocritical bigots who only care about equality for themselves and nobody else.
Bring up the fact that some of their most revered gay heroes, (such as Alfred Kinsey) also did lesser-known studies on adult-child sexual relationships and found them not to be harmful in most cases. Far more studies are available to support our position.
Accuse them of being “fair-weather allies”. They aren’t willing to fight for what’s right until it’s popular. Suggest that they only started supporting gay marriage after Obama gave it the a-ok, while many others have been fighting since being gay was actually a crime.
Insist that you can’t call yourself a progressive without supporting a family’s right to choose. It’s just good politics. The idea that sex is inherently sinful and harmful, and thus something children need to be “protected” from is a purely Judeo-Christian concept. Not all people and cultures agree with it. In a diverse, multicultural society where people of many faiths and ethnicities congregate, we shouldn’t make laws that hurt minorities based purely on religious thinking. If protecting children is the goal then punishing any potential harm that results is the ideal. If they disagree with this, ask why they don’t support banning cars since cars kill people too.
Internal comparisons. Compare those who don’t support Kind Acceptance to TERFs- Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminists, a highly disliked (in social justice circles) group of women who don’t believe transpeople are the sex they claim to be.
Burn them on the hypocrisy of supporting a position initially promoted by the now-discredited National Association for Reparative Therapy of Homosexuals. Stress that while the 1980s were a step back for equality, the long arc of history bends towards more freedom and rights for children. If you must, use the oft-maligned “wrong side of history” card, suggesting these people will be looked at no better than segregationists today.
The author of the document says that there’s not a lot that can be done to win over religious conservatives, but he does suggest creating “pedo-friendly support groups” within churches. Ultimately, though, the Religious Right can’t be co-opted, “only steamrolled like they usually are on other social issues.”
Read the whole thing. It is beyond abhorrent, but all too plausible. Forewarned is forearmed. Remember, the people who dug this thing up were not right-wing Christians, but radical feminists. In Britain, they are fighting on the front lines of this battle.
I suppose it is possible that this entire document is some sort of propaganda. If so, I will let you all know. I am unwilling to do the kind of digging online in this darkness to nail down with certainty that this is an authentic document. I will only caution you that I have not seen it verified yet. Nevertheless, it is out there, and it most definitely has the air of plausibility.
Do you remember the post I put up recently about this child drag queen called Desmond, and how his sexualization is being celebrated by the mainstream media? This is an example of the strategy in action. It’s not some conspiracist’s fantasy; it’s actually happening. And look at this story from VICE Canada, from back in February, about how pedophile advocates are campaigning on social media to normalize themselves — and how social media censors don’t know how to deal with it.
Question to the room: whether or not the Manifesto was actually written by a pedophile activist, or was written by a right-wing troll for whatever reason, how, exactly, do you think society will defend itself against this kind of thing, given that the strategy worked brilliantly for other gays, lesbians, and transgenders? Why will the line be drawn here? Serious question — one I’d especially like to hear LGBTs and their allies address. Because according to the Manifesto, you too will be targeted if you say no to their demands.
Let me be clear: I am not saying that homosexuality and/or transgenderism necessarily implies approval of pederasty! I don’t believe they do. The point of this post is to ask how society will defend itself against a strategy like this? Ultimately, that question doesn’t depend on the authenticity of this document. Even if it is an elaborate practical joke, what if pederasty advocates took it seriously, and acted on it?
UPDATE: A couple of you have written to say that this document sounds like a right-wing fake. It might well be. But for the sake of argument, how would we respond if some pro-pederasty groups and individuals adopted this proposed strategy? You can’t say, “It will never happen here.” It absolutely could. The sexualization of children and the removal of sexual inhibitions via popular culture is happening. A British feminist activist (not the one who found this document) wrote me to say:
I’ve had my own fears about this. There is most certainly a new acceptable face of paedophilia emerging. Pink news ran a gay siblings can practice incest story recently too. Teen vogue covered a story on how to have anal sex, the cross section (think biology text book) of bodies omitted the clitoris on the female. I am curious as to why any teenagers need to know about any of this in a cool how to guide. Drag queen story time in public libraries. I recently watched two mainstream dramas on uk tv where paedophiles were portrayed as reasonable humans, the poor helpless man who can’t stop wishing to rape kids must be shown compassion.
There are some hashtags on twitter about it too, I’ll seek some out. There really does seem a concerted effort to gently make access to kids a human rights issue.
If the “Manifesto” is one long elaborate troll — and it very well might be — then it still serves the very useful purpose of showing how the same arguments and strategies that have led our society to liberalize on sex and sexuality can be appropriated by pedophiles. We had better have a defense against them stronger than mere taboo.
UPDATE: Re-reading it, I doubt it’s authenticity. For me, the “tell” is how the author writes about the media. Still, the fact that even some liberal readers here are not sure that it’s real or fake tells us something about the current cultural moment, and what has become plausible.
Reader Devinicus, who is a university professor, writes:
A right-wing fake? The product of reactionary trolls? Who knows, but the reason the “Pedophile Manifesto” can pass as authentic is that the document echoes what the cultural left has been saying for years and years.
Those who haven’t read “After the Ball” should really do so. You cannot simply cry “troll!” after reading it.
Academics are already debating whether or not pedophilia is a “sexual orientation”.
The “disability rights” argument for not only legalized prostitution and state-provided prostitutes can be found in mainstream magazines such as The Atlantic. If disabled people have a “right to sex”, why not those of a pedophile orientation?
I don’t believe mainstreaming pedophilia (or more likely pederasty) will go far. Then again, I continue to be regularly amazed at how completely transgenderism has rolled feminists. Who among us would have said 10 years ago that “transgender women are women” would be the rallying cry of American elites?
Back in 2009 Mary Eberstadt wrote an article in First Things titled “How pedophilia lost its cool“. She claims that the taboo against pederasty was eroding markedly in the 1990s, and argues that historical chance — the breaking of the Catholic clergy abuse scandal in 2002 — reinvigorated the taboo.
I light of the powerful cultural currents of the early 21st century, why not believe we will need a similar stroke of luck to turn it back again?
His comment inside the comments thread contains links to the articles he cites.
By the way, if you haven’t read Ross Douthat’s piece on “The Redistribution of Sex,” you should. It starts like this:
One lesson to be drawn from recent Western history might be this: Sometimes the extremists and radicals and weirdos see the world more clearly than the respectable and moderate and sane. All kinds of phenomena, starting as far back as the Iraq War and the crisis of the euro but accelerating in the age of populism, have made more sense in the light of analysis by reactionaries and radicals than as portrayed in the organs of establishment opinion.
This is part of why there’s been so much recent agitation over universities and op-ed pages and other forums for debate. There’s a general understanding that the ideological mainstream isn’t adequate to the moment, but nobody can decide whether that means we need purges or pluralism, a spirit of curiosity and conversation or a furious war against whichever side you think is evil.
For those more curious than martial, one useful path through this thicket is to look at areas where extremists and eccentrics from very different worlds are talking about the same subject. Such overlap is no guarantee of wisdom, but it’s often a sign that there’s something interesting going on.
Which brings me to the sex robots.
You know you have to read the whole thing now. It’s a really interesting, and troubling, meditation on the incel phenomenon in light of what we have come as a culture to believe about sex. Douthat cites two recent pieces from the libertarian and socialist extremes that caused controversy when they were published, but that shed light — unwanted light in some cases — on the way we have come to regard sexuality and personhood.
I believe the Pedophile Manifesto, even if fake (as seems likely), does the same.