GrOW on pedophile groups

The mainstream media is to be commended for almost totally ignoring the recent "conference" convened by B4U-ACT (August 2011), a group that seeks to "remove the stigma" from the sexual assault and rape of children and teens in America. Only Fox News took passing note but did so with appropriate scorn and disbelief. There has been some discussion in the blog universe about the conference. But for the most part B4U-ACT and its assertion that there is nothing really wrong with raping children, has been recognized for what it is - An effort by the humans that rape children and those who benefit professionally and financially from enabling the rape of children.

Those who monitor the pedophile population and its allies will recognize most of the names of the B4U-ACT principals and proponents. There is nothing new in what is being put forth by this group, right down to the bogus studies (usually anecdotal, of five year or less duration, or conducted while the subjects are in prison or on probation – all qualities which negate any findings in studies of humans that rape children) and academic-style papers proffered in support of their demands that the humans that rape children be viewed as merely pursuing an alternative lifestyle.

The conference theme and other utterances by B4U-ACT officers and agents are disguised as professional communications, conferences or media releases, but are in fact attempts at normalizing and encouraging a reprehensible and grotesque criminal activity - the rape of children.

In April, 2011, the group wrote and posted a letter to the editor of the Harvard Mental Health Letter responding to an article titled "Pessimism About Pedophilia". In the letter the B4U board bemoans the "negative stereotypes and reliance on law-enforcement approaches that ...intensify stigma". The general tone of B4U communications is that the humans that rape children are merely misunderstood. If only society would just allow it, the rape of children could "involve feelings of affection, tenderness, and romantic attraction".(See link below)

Let's be very clear, the projected image of candlelight and flowers in regard to any adult-child interaction is not only inappropriate but repugnant. The question begged is why would anyone so shamelessly parade their psychopathy in public? One reason is as discussed, if the psychopath can convince many others that psychopathic behavior is acceptable, then that behavior more likely can be indulged in without fear of interdiction. Ask Bernie Madoff about how that works. (Also see "greatest group of pedo's" link below).

There is another purpose of such open communication, not only does the pedophile group write itself into the cultural record, albeit always in the margin, but they also are able to openly post a message of encouragement for other humans that rape children under the guise of an academic communication.

Another reason though, is that concealment is a primary characteristic of evil. (Other primary characteristics of evil are coercion, abridgement of choice or consent, and confusion). Some evildoers figure this out and begin acting out publicly or attempt to insert their pitch in the public discourse. These people openly declare their evil intent, some self-publish books on how to molest children or post best places to see children on websites, or form organizations with likeminded evildoers and so on. The theory is that doing evil openly and without apology gives the evildoer the appearance of doing nothing wrong. Throughout history, some evildoers have been successful, at least for a time, following this strategy.

This strategy, however, applied to pedophilia, may eventually result in another Curley v. NAMBLA. Only next time, the plaintiffs may succeed. In that case the "North America Man Boy Love Association" escaped a civil judgment only by dint of lack of expert witnesses on the plaintiff side. The Curley's were a working class family and would have been reliant on pro bono work by a court recognized expert to connect the NAMBLA literature in the possession of the murderers to the murder and rape of their son (and the crimes were committed in that order). Such a court recognized expert would have commanded high fees. So the Curley's dropped the suit in 2008. (see link below). But the day may come when some court finally connects the rape of a child or children to the pseudo-academic papers or self-published books issued in public by organizations such as the one under discussion. It’s a worthy notion and one wonders if a board of directors errors and omissions insurance covers the deliberate encouragement of injurious criminal actions - surely tortious behavior.

The B4U conference and the letter to the Harvard Medical Health letter set forth nothing new. In the letter to the editor, B4U complains that many of its correspondents are afraid to seek therapy, fearing judgmental attitudes or notification of the authorities that a child rapist has confided the crime. This is the tired old argument that if society would only make nice with the humans that rape children said humans would be more likely to “turn themselves in” or seek treatment. The only times that these humans seek treatment or “turn themselves in” is when they have been discovered or are about to be discovered. And even then, do so rarely and without conscience. Here’s what Dr. Anna Salter, a leading authority on the humans that rape children has written about her experiences with the “volunteer” rapist of children seeking therapy:

“‘Volunteer’ clients, offenders who weren’t ordered into therapy by a judge, rarely stuck with therapy. There was almost always someone behind them, I discovered – a spouse, a neighbor, someone who promised not to report the abuse if he would just ‘get help’. He would get help – for the few weeks it took for the neighbors or spouses to relax their guard. Then he would disappear from therapy, usually with high praise for my services.”

(Predators: Pedophiles, Rapists, & other Sex Offenders – Who they are, how they operate, and how we can protect ourselves and our children. Salter, Anna C. PhD. NewYork, NY: Basic Books. 2003.)

The keynote speaker at the B4U conference was Fred Berlin. Dr. Berlin has enjoyed a long association with Johns Hopkins University and Hospital. He does not appear to be affiliated with B4U and likely spoke at their conference in exchange for a fee. He is also a highly paid expert

witness at trials involving sex crimes and pedophilia. It was he who effortlessly led NBC's Chris Hansen down the primrose path in an interview published in Hansen's 2007 book.

In To Catch A Predator: Protecting Your Kids from Online Enemies Already in Your Home, Hansen reported this interview with Dr. Berlin:

“Berlin’s worth listening to for a lot of reasons, but one of the biggest is that the recidivism rate in his program is in the single digits. (Quote) ‘Our original study, in 1991, was a five-year study of six hundred men, over four hundred of whom had a diagnosis of pedophilia. In that five-year follow-up, less than eight percent recidivated. If we looked at people who were fully compliant with the treatment it was less than three percent. I’m sure we missed some things but that is still a far cry from the common public misconception that most people will quickly get back into trouble. That simply isn’t the case.’

This is blatant misdirection. The key is in the tautology: “The common public misconception that most people will quickly get back in trouble”. The insertion of “quickly” is what preserves Berlin’s construction around the word misconception. Dr. Berlin does not assert that the pedophiles will not recidivate just that it may not happen quickly. And he seems to aware that his data are vulnerable, “I’m sure we missed some things” is apparently meant to cover that angle.

The Doctor is sort of right about the quickly thing though. Only those who are set at liberty rush right back out and rape children again. Though on average the ones that are caught the second time are not caught for 3 and a half to a little over 4 years of "exposure time" - time in the community where the opportunity exists to re-offend - (See data below). And it has been estimated that only about one out of every ten child rapes is ever reported – which makes these following statistics all the more chilling. It is not hard to extrapolate a near 100% recidivism rate among "child molesters".

Within 25 years, 52% of those charged with child rape will be caught doing it again. 41% of those convicted will be caught doing it again. And 37% of those imprisoned for child rape will be caught doing it again within 25 years of their release into the community. This is from a Department of Justice study dated June 1997 (link below, p.12). The Internet, which has proven an effective tool for nabbing the humans that rape or would rape children, and sex offender registration laws may now days delay some of the humans that rape children. But the fact that they are then not imprisoned or are released into the communities portends only one thing: They will rape children again and again unless they are subjected to physical or chemical restraint.