medieval torture

Large photo

Testosterone is the hormone of great sex and great torture. In ancient times, when testosterone levels in men were higher, men were geniuses when it came to invent methods to deliver great pain and a slow death to other men, and occasionally women. A comfortable death was a luxury available to the lucky ones. So, know the risks, to others more than yourself, when embarking on testosterone enhancement with tongkat ali and butea superba.

Home | Index of articles

---

Home | Index of articles

----

Botox can cure erectile dysfunction, say experts

The Asian Age

There are many men that have to deal with erectile dysfunction and a dissatisfied sex life and disappointed partner. While there are many tips that doctors give to improve the situation it may not always work. Two Canadian urologists however have found the solution to the problem and they found that botox can improve sex lives of men suffering from the problem.

According to a report in the National Post, the Canadian urologists believe that injecting botox can help cure erectile dysfunction. The botulinum toxin injections can increase blood flow to the penis and paralyse the nerves that help the smooth muscles contract in the penis. The treatment would mostly last six months for anybody who would be interested in the injection.

The injection created by Dr. Sidney Radomski and Dr. Gerald Brock is yet in testing but can be a “game changer” for Erectile Dysfunction. The injection which has been previously used to treat wrinkles can cure most men with impotence in the process and help them have a better sex life. Interestingly, the drugs also do not have any side-effects like previously used methods so it will be a safer option.

----

Demography is destiny. That is why Saudi Arabia and Qatar have established billion-dollar funds to provide financial support for every child born in Europe to a Muslim parent. The money is available through mosque charities.

----

Testosterone found to be a driver for starting your own business

Business Matters Magazine

“Using the most widely accepted methods available for measuring testosterone levels and analysing three diverse samples, our findings indicate testosterone levels may constitute an important influence on the likelihood individuals will engage in self-employment,” said Professor Nicolaou.

“The study also utilises for the first time a new research design involving opposite-sex and same-sex twins to contribute to the ongoing debate regarding the significance and validity of the relationship between testosterone and self-employment.

“There has been a lot of discussion as to whether business behaviours are learned or can be down to biology and our research shows it is indeed possible that at least a portion of certain business behaviours can at least in part be attributed to biological influences.

“Our results represent an important first step into uncovering how key biological influences are related to self-employment and entrepreneurial activities.”

In the paper Testosterone and Tendency to Engage in Self-Employment due to be published in Management Science, Professor Nicolaou conducted three separate studies to explore the connection between testosterone and self-employment in greater depth.

In the first, information was utilised from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys (NHANES) of 2011-2012. This included 2,146 observations which found testosterone with self-employment is marginally supported among males but not among females.

In study two, Professor Nicolaou assessed whether the 2D:4D digit ratio – the ratio of the length of the index finger to the length of the ring finger, a marker of prenatal testosterone exposure – influences the likelihood of self-employment. He looked at 449 males and 525 females.

The results indicated males with a lower 2D:4D ratio in their left hand, or higher prenatal testosterone exposure, have a significantly greater likelihood of self-employment. This was also found to be marginally significant for females.

The third and final study examined the twin testosterone transfer effect in a sample of opposite-sex and same-sex twins from the National Survey of Midlife Development in the US.

Previous studies have suggested that female foetuses gestated with a male twin are more likely than female foetuses gestated with a female twin to be “masculinised” in their development and to have greater testosterone levels. This is because testosterone may pass from one twin to the other through maternal circulation and by diffusion through foetal membranes.

Professor Nicolaou found that these females were marginally more likely to be self-employed than females gestated with a female co-twin.

“The findings are relevant to both entrepreneurship and management audiences,” said Professor Nicolaou.

“Higher levels of testosterone can not only enhance an individual’s willingness to take risks but also diminish the likelihood that they feel fear with regards to risky situations, when coupled together it is possible that individuals with higher levels of testosterone could be prone to engage in entrepreneurial activities and self-employment.”

----

Kreutz Ideology analyses destruction differently. Social violence inherently benefits economic elites. The less peaceful a society, the less does social control restrict the liberties of the wealthy.

----


95 percent of the victims of violence are men. Because women are natural cowards who send men to handle things when they are dangerous.

----

LGBT movement’s other goal: Lower age of consent to 10 years old for psychiatric therapy – without parents’ knowledge or consent!

04/24/2017 - Catholic Citizens

Outrageous bill passed House Committee in Colorado Legislature on Tuesday – despite strong testimony by Colorado MassResistance and others. But the fight is just beginning!

Similar laws already passed in states across America.

April 20, 2017

Fresh from the recent victory stopping the LGBT movement’s “anti-therapy” bill in the Colorado Legislature, pro-family people are up against an equally frightening bill that has been filed and just passed its first hurdle toward becoming law. It’s the latest among similar laws that are being quietly passed across the country.

The LGBT lobby is quietly but forcefully pushing for laws to allow children as young as 10 years old to “decide” they need psychiatric therapy – without their parents’ knowledge or consent. LGBT-allied “therapists” could push vulnerable children to affirm and accept homosexual and transgender “identity” and behaviors as “normal.”

This has terrifying implications for parents and families. Children are emotionally defenseless and can easily be persuaded by adults that they need this “help” from unknown, agenda-driven mental health professionals.

It’s not clear who pays for these services, but it’s assumed that the state funds them. It’s also not clear that parents would be allowed access to the resulting medical records.

To accommodate these laws, many school-based clinics now offer “behavioral health” services. The LGBT movement and Planned Parenthood have long been placing “youth clinics” inside schools to access children away from parental oversight. This past week, a Colorado MassResistance mother called one of the clinics and was told they can arrange a psychiatrist to meet with a child on site at the school.

This scheme dovetails with the other, more public LGBT campaign in state legislatures across America to ban counseling and therapy for children who have unwanted homosexual or transgender feelings – but would allow therapy to affirm homosexuality or transgenderism. Sadly, such a ban would be particularly devastating to children who have been sexually molested.

The scare tactic: “suicide prevention”

To persuade legislators that these laws are necessary, the proponents focus on “suicide prevention.” They make emotional claims that many young children are suicidal, cannot talk to their parents about it, and unless professional intervention happens the children will kill or horribly injure themselves.

“Suicide prevention” has been a lobbying tactic used by the LGBT movement for decades to push for a wide range of programs and funding. This broad claim has little scientific basis and usually depends on blatantly unscientific school surveys such as the Massachusetts Youth Risk Behavior Survey. But sadly, most legislators are not informed enough to see through that. So too often, it works.

(Of course, it is true that psychological problems are far more prevalent among “LGBT-identifying” children. That’s because these behaviors are usually a symptom of earlier trauma, molestation, or other issues. So while these children may need psychological counseling, it must be done with non-activist professionals and parental oversight.)

California led the way for the radicals

In 2010 California passed the Mental Health Services for At-Risk Youth Act (SB 543), signed by Gov. Schwarzenegger, which lowered the age of consent to 12. The law was heavily lobbied by Equality California and other LGBT groups.

Since then, several states across the US have passed laws lowering the age of consent for outpatient (and inpatient) psychotherapy to various age levels, with various degrees of independence for children and notification of parents in these decisions.

The fight begins in Colorado

On April 5, 2017, Bill HB17-1320 was filed in the Colorado Legislature. It would lower the age of consent for outpatient psychotherapy to 10. (Read the text for the original bill here.) Soon after it was filed, the proponents got nervous and offered an amendment to change the age of consent to 12. But the bill is quite clear about its intent. It immediately went to the Democrat-controlled House Public Health Care & Human Services Committee.

A contentious public hearing

On April 18, the Committee held a public hearing for the bill, followed by a vote of the committee members. It was not an overwhelming turnout like other LGBT-related hearings. About 35 people showed up. All but 5 who testified were supporters of the bill.

Interestingly, the LGBT lobby seems to be hiding in the background on this. They sent in individual activists and allies to testify, but they did not give an LGBT affiliation. However, the LGBT movement’s fingerprints were there. It was almost all emotional, often tearful arguments about how they and/or their loved ones personally suffered and went through suicide issues as children because legislation did not exist to help them.

Most of the arguments were non-intellectual, irrational, and emotional. They did not focus on professional medical or legal issues. Much of their testimony was rambling, and didn’t even pertain to the bill. There were a lot of threats of children being suicidal, or at least cutting themselves badly, if they had to rely on their parents to decide for them. One of the sponsors of the bill even testified, and began crying when telling her story about her young son who she said wanted to commit suicide. But it had nothing to do with the intent of the bill. It seemed like they were simply throwing anything they could think of at the legislators to see what would stick.

The pro-family people included MassResistance Colorado and Colorado Family Action (CFA), including two attorneys that CFA brought. The MassResistance Colorado parents testified strongly, point by point against the bill, and how its true intent would horribly subvert parents and give an unknown therapist free latitude to diagnose and “treat” their children with whatever approach they chose, without knowing vital medical history or other information from parents.

The MassResistance Colorado parents also submitted a letter by Dr. Michelle Cretella, President of the American College of Pediatricians, against Bill HB 17-1320. Dr. Cretella strongly advised the legislators that adolescents are not capable of making these kinds of judgments about their mental health and psychological therapy.

The CFA attorneys cited constitutional problems with subverting parental rights, and noted that the door would be opened for lawsuits based on past Supreme Court decisions. As Dr. Cretella also observed, young children, especially those in some emotional distress, have absolutely no competence to consent to psychological treatment.

But more importantly, the attorneys noted that statistically these laws have had virtually no positive effect. In California the child suicide rate has actually increased since their law was passed.

Somewhat shockingly, when one of the parents cited the ideological agenda and special interests behind this bill which clearly seem to override interests and needs of the parents and children, the Committee Chairman said that “impugning the motives” of people would not be allowed in testimony!

Committee barely passes it

When the testimony ended, the Committee passed a few minor amendments, including one that would change the age of consent from 10 to 12. The main sponsor explained that she had met with “stakeholders” (i.e., activists supporting the bill) and apparently decided that 10 years old was too hard to sell right now. Then the Committee passed the bill 7-6, along party lines.

One of the Democrat committee members, Dan Pabon, didn’t even bother to be there for the testimony; he only came in for the vote, and voted “yes”.

Interestingly, one of the Republican committee members, Lois Landgraf, was a sponsor of the bill. But after hearing the testimony, she changed her mind and voted against it. She told legislators:

“If a suicidal child can’t go to parents, there has to be a solution, and I don’t know what it is, but this isn’t it. This bill was too intrusive into the parent-child relationship, so I removed my sponsorship.”

Another Republican committee member noted that it’s being promoted as a “suicide prevention” bill, but that it’s far more expansive and broad than that. “It’s really a mental health bill that excludes parents,” he told his fellow legislators.

And the fight continues

The bill now goes to the full House, which could happen any day now.

We believe that this bill can be stopped in the Senate, if it gets there. The problem in other states, we believe, has been not enough, if any, pro-family firepower. But even in Colorado it will take some serious work. The CFA people are already scheduling meetings with Senators, and MassResistance Colorado is also prepared to help.

It’s terrifying that most citizens have no idea these laws are being passed in America to give vulnerable children into the hands of “mental health” activists, quacks, or worse.

----

Alsey, Illinois: Aurora man gets 21 years in prison for sex assault of child

An n Aurora man convicted in May for sexually assaulting a child he knew has been sentenced to more than two decades in prison.

Full article

----

Female sexuality is a trade merchandise. And in feminism, the seller and the merchandise are the same person. Merchandise that sells itself? That can impossibly work out. This is why the patriarchy is the only sensible form of human social organization.

----

Best Price in UK for Penis Enlargement Injections

Moorgate Urology

It’s no wonder Moorgate Urology has seen an increase in Penis Enlargement Injections, maybe the low price of just £280 per syringe and the instant results is causing this surge of interest. Maybe the idea of having penis enlargement surgery is a little daunting for some, when you can have instant results for little money it can be a easier decision to make when choosing Moorgate Urology for Penis Enlargement Injections.

This is done by the use of hyaluronic acid injection of a tried and tested volumising treatment called Juvederm. Hyaluronic acid is widely used in aesthetic medical circles The attraction of this treatment is that there is no surgery involved. The treatment takes just minutes and there is no downtime afterwards. The penis is instantly thicker too, no waiting for results. The results of the Juvederm thickening treatment typically last for twelve months.

the treatment needs to be topped up around one year later, again with the knowledge that there is no downtime involved and you get instant results.

Check out the benefits of our Penis Enlargement Injections

Instant results

No downtime

Cheaper option than surgery

Leading dermal filler brand

Treatment performed by a GMC registered Plastic Surgeon

Free consultations and follow-up appointments

If you want to find out more about penis enlargement contact Moorgate Urology today and arrange a free initial consultation to see what could be achieved for you

----

If you are still invested in the real estate of European cities, get out! A terrorist attack with chemical weapons will happen. Even if it doesn't kill many people, it will drive prices down. Accross the continent.

----

Caverflo - another death caused by fake tongkat ali shipped from Singapore

Food Safety News

BY NEWS DESK | MAY 26, 2017

An apparently healthy US consumer has died after consuming a standard dosage of Coverflo, an instant coffee marketed as a “natural herbal” aphrodisiac. In an urgent effort to prevent further fatalities, the is now a recall nationwide. An FDA investigation found that this alleged tongkat ali, like many others originating in Singapore, contains uncontrolled amounts of prescription drugs chemicals for the treatment of erectile dysfunction.

In recent months, more than 20 men have died in China, India, Southeast Asia, and Africa after consuming fake tongkat ali that actually contained uncontrolled amounts of homelab-fabricated prescription drugs. All item originated from Singapore, where the mixing of prescription drugs into food supplements is not illegal as long as they are sold abroad.

The internet retailer Amazon has been flooded with Singaporean products claiming to be tongkat ali by distributors such as "Pure Science Supplements" and "RealHerbs". Another Singaporean outfit for what is claimed to be tongkat ali was named "Herbolab".

Caverflo.com posted the recall of 25-gram packets of “Caverflo Natural Herbal Coffee” Thursday with the Food and Drug Administration.

“Caverflo.com has received a report of an individual death after use of the coffee. Caverflo Natural Herbal Coffee may also contain undeclared milk.”

The product is a combination of instant coffee and natural aphrodisiacs, according to the Caverflo website, but the recall notice warned the product can interact with prescription medications. Also, people who have an allergy or severe sensitivity to milk could have an allergic reaction if they consume the instant coffee.

“These undeclared ingredients may interact with nitrates found in some prescription drugs, such as nitroglycerin, and may lower blood pressure to dangerous levels. Men with diabetes, high blood pressure, high cholesterol, or heart disease often take nitrates,” according to the recall notice.

The company distributed the instant coffee direct to consumers nationwide via internet sales from August 2016 through February this year. Caverflo is notifying customers of the recall by email.

“Consumers that have Caverflo Natural Herbal Coffee which is being recalled should stop using (it), discard (it) and contact their doctor,” according to the recall notice.

----

Men are our competitors. We want less of those around. Women are our prey. We want them poor and helpless.

----


You probably have to look at imagery of death and dying regularly to stay focused on what really counts in life: great sex before you are gone anyway.

----

Challenging Mainstream Thought About Beauty’s Big Hand in Evolution

Not long ago, a physicist at Stanford posed a rhetorical question that took me by surprise.

“Why is there so much beauty?” he asked.

Beauty was not what I was thinking the world was full of when he brought it up. The physicist, Manu Prakash, was captivated by the patterns in seawater made as starfish larvae swam about. But he did put his finger on quite a puzzle: Why is there beauty? Why is there any beauty at all?

Richard O. Prum, a Yale ornithologist and evolutionary biologist, offers a partial answer in a new book, “The Evolution of Beauty: How Darwin’s Forgotten Theory of Mate Choice Shapes the Animal World — and Us.” He writes about one kind of beauty — the oh-is-he/she-hot variety — and mostly as it concerns birds, not people. And his answer is, in short: That’s what female birds like.

This won’t help with understanding the appeal of fluid dynamics or the night sky, but Dr. Prum is attempting to revive and expand on a view that Charles Darwin held, one that sounds revolutionary even now.

The idea is that when they are choosing mates — and in birds it’s mostly the females who choose — animals make choices that can only be called aesthetic. They perceive a kind of beauty. Dr. Prum defines it as “co-evolved attraction.” They desire that beauty, often in the form of fancy feathers, and their desires change the course of evolution.

All biologists recognize that birds choose mates, but the mainstream view now is that the mate chosen is the fittest in terms of health and good genes. Any ornaments or patterns simply reflect signs of fitness. Such utility is objective. Dr. Prum’s — and Darwin’s — notion of beauty is something more subjective, with no other meaning than its aesthetic appeal.

Dr. Prum wants to push evolutionary biologists to re-examine their assumptions about utility and beauty, objectivity and subjectivity. But he also wants to reach the public with a message that is clear whether or not you dip into the technical aspects of evolution. The yearning to pick your own mate is not something that began with humans, he says. It can be found in ducks, pheasants and other creatures.

“Freedom of choice matters to animals,” he said recently on a birding trip to a beach near his office in New Haven. “We’ve been explaining away desire rather than actually trying to understand or explain it. That’s one of the biggest shifts that the book is about.”

The book ranges from hard science to speculation, and he does not expect his colleagues to agree with him on all of his ideas. In fact, he gets a twinkle in his eye when he anticipates intellectual conflict.

“I don’t know anybody who actually agrees with me,” he said with a frank smile.

“Even my own students aren’t there yet.”

To grasp his view, a little bit of history is in order. Darwin famously proposed the idea of evolution by natural selection, what is often called survival of the fittest. To put it simply, living things vary in their inherited traits, from speed to color to sense of smell. The traits of the individuals who survive longer and have the most offspring become more common. So, over time, the faster antelope have more young, the fastest of them have more offspring, and antelope end up very speedy.

But reproduction isn’t just about surviving and staying healthy long enough to mate. You have to find a mate. And in many species, your mate must choose you. This process is sexual selection. Female birds are often the ones choosing. And their choices can produce male birds that are incredibly colorful, and some that are elaborate dancers or designers of striking boudoirs — like the bower birds. If, for example, females like males with long tails, then long-tailed males have more offspring, and the longest-tailed of those offspring reproduce more. In the end, that species becomes known for its long tails.

Maydianee Andrade, an evolutionary biologist and vice dean at the University of Toronto, Scarborough, who studies sexual selection and teaches evolution, said that “the question is basically this. You can think of females when they are choosing a mate as foraging. So what are they looking for?”

“If you’re dragging a giant tail behind you, that might tell the female something,” she said. “A male that survives carrying a large heavy tail is more impressive than a male that survives with a short tail.”

But survival might not have anything to do with it. Some female finches use white feathers to line their nest, perhaps to camouflage white eggs. In one experiment, they also liked males with white feathers stuck on their heads better than other males. This seemed to be an aesthetic choice, and also proved that there is no accounting for taste.

Darwin contended that selection-based mate choice was different from natural selection because the females were often making decisions based on what looked good — on beauty, as they perceived it — and not on survival or some objective quality like speed or strength. Scientists of that era reacted negatively, partly because of the emphasis on females. “Such is the instability of vicious feminine caprice that no constancy of coloration could be produced by its selective action,” wrote St. George Jackson Mivart, an English biologist who was at first a great supporter and later a critic of natural selection.

Alfred Russel Wallace, who came up with the theory of evolution at the same time as Darwin, preferred the idea that the colors and patterns meant something — either they were signs that this was a male of the right species, or they indicated underlying fitness. Perhaps only a strong, healthy male could support such a big, beautiful tail.

At the very birth of evolutionary theory, scientists were arguing about how sexual selection worked. And they kept at it, through the discovery of genes and many other advances.

Fast forward to the 1980s, when Dr. Prum was in graduate school at the University of Michigan, sharing an office with Geoffrey Hill, now a professor at Auburn University.

At that time, mainstream evolutionary thought took a big swing toward the idea that ornaments and fancy feathers were indications of underlying fitness. “Animals with the best ornamentation were the best males,” Dr. Hill said. This was called “honest signaling” of underlying genetic fitness. The idea, he said, “almost completely ran over what was the old idea of beauty.”

Dr. Hill, for one, was completely convinced. “I was pretty sure I could explain all ornaments in all animals as honest signaling.” But, he added, he has since reconsidered. There are some extreme forms of ornamentation that he thinks don’t signal anything, but rather are a result of the kind of process Dr. Prum favors.

“You can’t explain a peacock’s tail with honest signaling,” Dr. Hill said.

But, he said, he thought Dr. Prum had taken an important idea and gotten “a little bit carried away with it.” The book, he said, “was a great read, and I could tell he put his heart and soul into it.” But, he said, he found it “scientifically disappointing.”

Darwin himself, Dr. Hill said, “was completely unsatisfied with his work on sexual selection.” And the mainstream of evolutionary biology is not hostile to a partial role for arbitrary female choice. Dr. Hill has recently argued for combining several different processes to explain sexual selection.

Dr. Prum is indeed given to enthusiasm, and to intellectual contention. He has been on the winning side of initially unpopular ideas before.

As a graduate student, he sided with researchers who wanted to change the way animals are classified, to emphasize their evolutionary descent. The new idea was called cladistics and it is now the established idea. He has done groundbreaking research on both the physical structure and the evolution of feathers, and he was an early supporter of the notion that birds descended from dinosaurs, another new idea that is now the mainstream view.

In neither case was he a lone voice. But he is nothing if not confident, and not only in his science. Take the question of pizza.

In New Haven, pizza is something akin to a religion, and there are different sects. When I asked Dr. Prum who makes the best pizza in town, thinking he would pick one of the rival pizzerias, he didn’t hesitate.

“I do,” he said. He uses an outdoor grill with a special attachment, and he described his pursuit of the perfect pizza in some detail. When I raised an eyebrow he offered me a reference, a friend and writer who had consumed the Prum pies.

He also acknowledged that he approaches many things with single-minded intensity.

“I’m given to obsessions,” he said. Bird watching was the first and most long-lasting. Evolutionary biology may be the deepest. Cooking, opera, gardening and politics (left-wing) are others.

He has disagreed with the dominant view of sexual selection since graduate school and sees his new book, which he hopes will reach beyond scientists, as a kind of manifesto. It has too many parts to summarize. He takes a chapter, for instance, to speculate that same-sex attraction in humans evolved in our ancestors through female choices that undermine male sexual coercion. For a full account, you need to read the book.

But one particular aspect of his argument is his distress at the idea that almost all evolutionary change is assumed to be adaptive, contributing to fitness. In other words, if a fish is blue, it must be blue for a reason. The color must help it escape predators or sneak up on prey, or be otherwise useful in some way. Beauty, therefore, must be adaptive, or a sign of underlying qualities that are adaptive. Pick a behavior or an ornament or a physical trait, and it is useful until proven otherwise.

That’s backward, says Dr. Prum. Take beauty. Since animals have aesthetic preferences and make choices, beauty will inevitably appear. “Beauty happens,” as he puts it, and it should be taken as nonadaptive until proven otherwise.

In proposing this so-called “null hypothesis,” he draws on the work of Mark A. Kirkpatrick at the University of Texas, Austin, who studies population genetics, genomics and evolutionary theory and had read parts of “The Evolution of Beauty.”

“I’m very impressed that Rick is taking on this crusade,” Dr. Kirkpatrick said. He is not convinced that all aspects of sexual selection are based on arbitrary choices for perceived beauty, but, he said, if Dr. Prum can convince some other scientists to question their assumptions, “he will do a great service.”

For Dr. Prum, at least, there is a partial answer to the question posed by Dr. Prakash. Why are birds beautiful?

“Birds are beautiful because they’re beautiful to themselves.”

----

This site contains photos of brutality. Semantically and philosophically speaking, the photos are not brutal. What is brutal is the depicted reality.

----

Milo Yiannopoulos and the Myth of the Gay Pedophile

The journalist’s comments suggest gay men enjoy sex with children—an idea that has been widely debunked.

The Atlantic

In the comment that cost him his book deal and speaker slot at the Conservative Political Action Conference, the Breitbart journalist and right-wing provocateur Milo Yiannopoulos defended “relationships in which those older men help those young boys to discover who they are.”

In the video, a clip of an old podcast episode that was tweeted this weekend by the group Reagan Battalion, Yiannopoulos says he isn’t defending pedophilia, before adding that “in the gay world, some of the most enriching ... relationships between younger boys and older men can be hugely positive experiences.” (Yiannopoulos later blamed “sloppy phrasing," saying when he was 17 he was in a relationship with a 29-year-old man. The age of consent in the U.K. is 16.)

Among the many reasons Yiannopoulos’s comments are being criticized, as Vox’s German Lopez points out, is that he lends support to a claim, made by some anti-gay activists, that many gay men harbor a secret desire to molest children. For example, a 2002 document that’s still live on the website of the Family Research Council reads that “Male homosexuals commit a disproportionate number of child sex abuse cases.” It calls those who don’t acknowledge this fact “homosexual apologists.”

The suspected (and widely debunked) link to child molestation has been used to suggest that gay people shouldn’t be allowed to work with children. In 2005, just 49 percent of poll respondents told Gallup they think gay people should be allowed to be clergy members, and just 54 percent said they should be elementary-school teachers.

Prior to the 1970s, gays in the U.S. were primarily painted by their opponents as “sexual perverts,” deviants who were mentally or morally flawed in some way. The think-of-the-children angle, meanwhile, was spearheaded by Anita Bryant, a Christian singer who successfully lobbied for the repeal of a 1977 Miami ordinance barring anti-gay discrimination. Bryant claimed that if gays were granted equal status in society, they would molest children in schools or recruit them to their lifestyle, according to news reports at the time. “The ordinance condones immorality and discriminates against my children’s rights to grow up in a healthy, decent community,” Bryant told reporters that year.

The name of Bryant’s advocacy organization underscored her point: Save Our Children.

The incident is now considered, by some, to be the beginning of organized, conservative-Christian opposition to gay rights. “Back in 1977, there was no organized religious right, per se. Anita Bryant was a pioneer,” Fred Fejes, a Florida Atlantic University professor, told the Miami Herald in 2007.

Today, most mainstream researchers say there’s little basis for Bryant’s argument. Psychologically, pedophilia is considered distinct from sexual orientation. Both gay and straight people are attracted to other adults, while pedophiles target children. Pedophiles can be fixated, meaning they are only attracted to other children, or regressed, meaning they prefer adults but will pursue children under stress or when adults aren’t available. Even if in some contexts, such as the Catholic priest sex-abuse scandal, the victims and perpetrators were disproportionately likely to be of the same gender, most researchers say the motivating factor wasn’t sexual orientation. Instead, it was the perpetrators’ pathological attraction to children and their access to children of a certain gender—altar boys, in the priests’ case. “The important point is that many child molesters cannot be meaningfully described as homosexuals, heterosexuals, or bisexuals (in the usual sense of those terms) because they are not really capable of a relationship with an adult man or woman,” writes Gregory Herek, an emeritus professor of social psychology at the University of California at Davis, on his blog.

Herek described a number of studies in which scientists tried to find a link between homosexuality and pedophilia—and came up short:

In conclusion, Herek writes, “The empirical research does not show that gay or bisexual men are any more likely than heterosexual men to molest children.” Writing on the Catholic priest sex-abuse scandal in the William & Mary Journal of Women and the Law, Nicole Travers similarly concludes that “pedophilia has nothing to do with sexual orientation.”

Nevertheless, the child-molestation question still makes its way into important policy discussions about gay rights. As late as 2010, Family Research Council president Tony Perkins was quoted citing the link between homosexuality and pedophilia as a reason not to repeal Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. In Russia, “protecting children” was the stated purpose of a 2013 law banning “gay propaganda.”

Perhaps it’s just another sign of the upside-down nature of the current political moment that what got Yiannopoulos booted from a conservative gathering, in the end, was exploiting a myth that a religious conservative invented decades ago.

----

Many men who are good in making money are total failures when it comes to spending it. If you have money, buy love, and the best sex ever. Because having the best sex ever not only is satisfaction, but also generates your immortal soul. See Kreutz Religion.

----

Home | Index of articles