bohm - he was talking much more broadly than just his own experiances " In a recent interview with the Times magazine, Richard Dawkins attempted to defend what he called “mild pedophilia,”
Richard Dawkins defends mild pedophilia, says it does not cause lasting harm
by chrisuk 320 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse
-
-
frankiespeakin
“mild pedophilia,”
Grates on the nerve of black and white thinkers who prefer just the one term which simply defines a broad catagory of behaivor, thus stunting any further processing of information.
-
bohm
Chrisuk: so what is the quote?
Can we agree dawkins was subject to abuse as a child and did not suffer much harm, at least according to himself?
my experience is that what other people claim dawkins sayes is often a lot more interesting than what he actually sayes..
-
nonjwspouse
If dawkins was speakin for himself he sure used a broad brush on what is only Considered from a sick mind. Pedophilia. This man has serious issues when expressing his opinion as if it is applicable to anything or anyone but his own experience.
-
chrisuk
Frankie - I don't think there is such a thing as “mild pedophilia,” Is there also mild rape?
bohm - Dawkins seems to state that every victim think in the same way he does.
-
bohm
What appears to be the quote:
“I am very conscious that you can’t condemn people of an earlier era by the standards of ours. Just as we don’t look back at the 18th and 19th centuries and condemn people for racism in the same way as we would condemn a modern person for racism, I look back a few decades to my childhood and see things like caning, like mild pedophilia, and can’t find it in me to condemn it by the same standards as I or anyone would today,” he said.
...so if we apply basic reading comprehension, dawkins is actually saying he condemn mild pedophelia today...
i know, the lie is more interesting.
-
chrisuk
The lie? That qoute is even worse “mild pedophilia,” and " Mild racism" Yep, Dawkins is coming off real well here.
-
bohm
Chrisuk:bohm - Dawkins seems to state that every victim think in the same way he does.
He seems to state or he do state? again, where is the source to these claims?
-
bohm
chrisuk: what exactly offends you? i dont mean which two words put in your context offends you; what has dawkins actually said that offends you?
-
villagegirl
This is not a "theist" issue, its a social scientist issue. His reference to racism as some kind of parallel is so off the mark, its hard to know where to begin. Except to say the only reason racism was addressed at all was because a whole segment of society identified it, exposed it, and fought long political battles to eradicate it from policy. Childhood sexual abuse has been studied at length by psychologists , and the case studies are ubiquitous, published, and examined in such depth, that only those with questionable agendas or in complete denial, can ignore. To claim acts of so-called "mild" pedophia, "had no effect" is very similar to the mindset of pedophiles themselves who very regularily claim they "love" their victims and "did not hurt them". I would not leave a child alone with this Dawkins, based on his stated views. An adult leading a child into sexual acts is a basic violation of trust. It is also a shaming of the child, the child takes on the shame, and has two choices, internalize it, or act it out, and deny their boundaries were wrongfully violated. Many pedophiles were themselves sexually abused as children, and took on the identity of the predator. Manipulating a child into participating and then convincing them it was a "mutual decision", is a typical ploy of pedophiles. This statement of Dawkins is not the statement of an enlightened man, it is the statement of man thoroughly disconnected with both his affect and effect.