Ethics and the "Lunatic Fringe": The Case of Pedophile Organizations by Mary de Young Mary de Young is an instructor in the Human Services Division of Grand Rapids Junior College and a consulting clinician to the Circuit Court of Kent County. The Rene Guyon Society, the Childhood Sensuality Circle, and the North American Man/Boy Love Association (NAM- BLA) are pedophile organizations that are striving to gain respectability and support in society. Because they have a philosophy that supports and encourages adult sexual be- havior with children, these organizations are condemned by the larger society. In order to make their unpopular philos- ophy more palatable and their members more acceptable, these organizations have created a code of ethics that places parameters on their philosophy and restrictions on the be- havior of their members. This paper examines the philoso- phy, goals, and strategies of these three organizations. The Rene Guyon Society, created in 1962 by a small group of parents after attending a conference on sexuality, took its name from a French jurist and Freudian psychologist who had been an outspoken advocate of adult-child sex. It also adopted his motto as its slogan: "Sex by year eight or else it's too late." The society champions the abolition of statu- tory rape laws so parents can give their consent for their children to engage in sexual activities with adults, and pro- vides counseling and support services for those parents at- tracted to, yet skeptical of, its philosophy and practices. Be- lieving that affection often overlooks age differences, the Childhood Sensuality Circle was established in 1971 for the purpose of promoting sexual self-determination for adults and children. It advocates the abolition of age of consent laws and encourages children to use their own standards in the selection of adult sexual partners. The North American Man/Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) was formed in 1978 in reaction to the arrests of 24 Revere, Massachusetts, men for sexual activity with adolescent boys. Promoting an end to what it refers to as the state's repression of sexuality, NAMBLA also champions the abolition of all age of consent laws and works for the release of all men incarcerated or hospitalized for noncoercive sex with minors. Shielded by a small but vocal movement that views the taboo against adult sexual behavior with children as unen- lightened and anachronistic (De Mott 1980), these pedophile organizations have emerged from the "lunatic fringe" into public attention; their arrival has been greeted by a smat- tering of support and an abundance of criticism. Viewing themselves as beleagured minority groups whose time has not yet come, these pedophile organizations have a vested interest in making their unpopular philosophy palatable, a difficult task indeed, in view of the deeply ingrained taboo against adult-child sex. A second goal of the pedophile or- ganizations is to disavow the deviance of their members. In order to achieve these two goals-making their unpopular philosophy palatable and their members acceptable- the pe- dophile organizations have created a code of ethics, of sorts, that places parameters on their philosophy and limitations on the behavior of their members. Through an examination of the publications, bulletins, and newsletters of the Rene Guyon Society, the Childhood Sen- suality Circle, and the North American Man/Boy Love As- sociation, several features of the code of ethics of these pe- dophile organizations become evident: (1) a "pro-child" ideology, (2) emphasis on consensual sexual activity, and (3) the placing of limitations on members' behavior. Each of these aspects will be discussed in turn. PRO-CHILD IDEOLOGY. In order to reduce society's con- demnation, the first priority of pedophile organizations in creating a code of ethics has been to make broad "pro-child" proclamations, couched in the rhetoric of children's rights. NAMBLA, for example, states that it believes that "children need more than sexual freedom; they need the right to control all aspects of their lives and bodies, without the interference of adults, whether the family, the state or the church. They should be treated like full human beings, not as the private property of their parents and the state" (1980:2). A similar declaration is made by the Childhood Sensuality Circle: "To live a full life is every individual's birthright. We advocate the total liberation of children, not to confer on them the same legal status as adults, but to accord them the oppor- tunity to be all that they can be as children" (1981:1). Apparently recognizing that skeptics and detractors may not be convinced of the sincerity of such pro-child statements when they are issued by organizations that advocate pedo- philia and incest, these pedophile organizations have also allied themselves with pro-child movements that exist in the larger society. The Childhood Sensuality Circle advocates and actively promotes sex education of children (CSC,1981: l), an end to corporal punishment in schools (1981:2), child abuse prevention and treatment (1981:3), and other such esoterically pro-child ideologies as home births (1982b:15), anti-circumcision (1982a:l0), and the abolition of the peace- time military draft (1982c:11). In a statement of philosophy by one of its spokespersons, NAMBLA also opposes the military draft, the circumcision of male infants, and the "sex- ual mutilation" of female infants, and advocates birth con- trol, sex education, abortion on demand, and even the World Health Organization's baby formula code (1983:2). In testimony before a senate subcommittee investigating the sexual exploitation of children, Rene Guyon Society spokesperson Tim O'Hara offered what comes closest to a pro-child pronouncement from that pedophile organization: "[We] feel that sexual abuse is not a crime. The real crime is making a child ashamed of their body" (Subcommittee on Select Education 1977:168). Less articulate than the other pedophile organizations in making sweeping statements about children's rights and freedoms, the society nonetheless has actively spoken out against a variety of social ills that have left victimized children in its wake: prostitution, drug abuse, and murder, to name but a few (Rene Guyon Society 1982:1). All of these pro-child proclamations, of course, are made for a very specific purpose: to convince the larger society that the philosophy of these organizations is built upon a foun- dation of respect, care, and love for children in general, and that the members of the organizations, in practice, are lovers, not abusers, of children. And to further demonstrate that their love of children extends into their sexual activities, they develop a second feature of the code of ethics: an emphasis on consensual sexual activity with children. CONSENSUAL SEXUAL ACTIVITY. The issue of consent is a thorny one. Each pedophile organization believes that a child can give full and knowledgeable consent for sexual activity with an adult, yet none is so ignorant as to disregard the inherent difference in power between a child and an adult that may render that consent invalid. In an effort to resolve that dilemma, the pedophile organizations redefine the issue of consent in terms of the age of the child. The most evasive and apparently the most troubled of these groups on this issue, NAMBLA publicly focuses on its members' sexual activities with adolescents rather than chil- dren. There is an implied morality in that emphasis: ado- lescents, presumably, are less likely to be intimidated or coerced by an adult and are therefore more likely to be able to give free consent. Yet many NAMBLA members are sexually attracted to children, not adolescents, so the question that organization must answer is whether children can give consent to sexual activities with adults. "The lower the age," a NAMBLA founder conceded in a recent interview, "the more compli- cated it becomes" (NAMBLA 1982:7), and although that does not answer the question, one of the stated goals of the organization does: NAMBLA advocates and lobbies for the abolition of any age of consent laws. If successful in that mission, neither age nor consent will remain a "complicated issue." The Childhood Sensuality Circle also has difficulties with the age at which children can give consent for sexual activ- ities with adults. In a recent publication, the Circle states that a child is not able to fully cope with his or her physical environment until age six (1981:5). That statement would seem to imply that a child cannot give consent for sexual behavior with an adult until that age, but the Circle never states that explicitly, nor does it cite any evidence in support of its assumption that a six year old can fully cope with his or her physical environment. Like NAMBLA, the Childhood Sensuality Circle circumvents this delicate issue by advo- cating the abolition of all age of consent laws. The Rene Guyon Society is the most explicit in regard to the issue of age, standing firm as it does on its motto: "Sex by year eight or else it's too late." This pedophile organization simply assumes that the child's physiological ability to tol- erate the adult's sexual behavior is sufficient to constitute consent. Even infants can tolerate masturbation, fondling, and oral contact, but the Society does not believe that a female child can physiologically tolerate sexual intercourse until she is "eleven or twelve" years old. The Society, how- ever, cites enigmatic scientific studies that "prove" that a four-year-old child's anus is large enough to accommodate an adult male's penis without discomfort (1982:1). LIMITATIONS ON MEMBERS' BEHAVIOR. A third com- ponent of the ethical code of pedophile organizations is the setting of limits on the behavior of the individual members. The Rene Guyon Society grudgingly urges all members to "obey all bad sex laws until they are changed. . . . No scoff- laws welcome" (1982:1). Its primary limitation, however, and the one most persistently demanded, is that condoms be used by adults in their sexual activities with children. This, then, becomes "moral" sexual activity, and the Society openly advocates adult sexual intercourse and anal inter- course with children, incest, children's sexual activity with other children, and child pornography (1982:1). The Childhood Sensuality Circle is the least explicit in placing limitations on members' behavior, and limits itself to brief statements such as "we are resolutely against the [sexual] traffic in children" (1982b:2). Vague admonitions are frequently found in the Circle's Nusletter, such as this response to a father worried about how to approach his young daughters for sexual activities: Because of the power imbalance between children and adults, I think child-adult sex is better conducted in a context where the child can stay or walk away, take it or leave it. . . . I would urge you to find a teen or adult to take care of your orgasm needs, and involve the children only in an occasional romp in bed with mommy and daddy (1982a:11). NAMBLA has placed the most limitations on its members' behavior. In a recent interview, a NAMBLA spokesperson stated, "We have strict rules against members being involved in such crimes as prostitution, the production of commercial pornography, or sex by force. If I ever knew of a member of NAMBLA who [had done this], I would report him to the police" (NAMBLA 1982:7). Asserting that the primary pur- pose of the organization is to provide "backup support for men and boys involved with each other in consensual ways," NAMBLA spokespersons disabuse anyone of the idea that the organization exists to "provide sexual outlets for people" (1983:1). Again, the function of these organizational limitations on members' behavior is to keep that behavior within moral bounds as defined by that organization. It also serves to convey to the larger society that the most exploitative and abusive behavior of people sexually attracted to children is condemned by the organizations just as it is by the larger society. Pedophile organizations have a philosophy that is generally considered repugnant by the larger society and a membership that is judged as perverted. In order to make their unpopular philosophy palatable and their members acceptable, these pedophile organizations have created an ethical code. This code makes pro-child statements and allies itself with pro- child movements in the larger society. It also emphasizes consensual sexual activity with minors in order to present its members as lovers rather than abusers of children. Finally, it places limitations on the behavior of its members in an effort to demonstrate to the larger society that the organi- zation, too, takes a stand against the abuse and exploitation of innocent children. REFERENCES CITED Childhood Sensuality Circle 1981 V. Davila, ed. San Diego, Calif. CSC Pamphlet. 1982a Nusletter 8(2). 1982b Nusletter 8(3). 1982c Nusletter 8(5). DeMott, B. 1980 The Pro-Incest Lobby. Psychology Today 13(10):11-13 North American Man/Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) 1980 What Is NAMBLA? New York. 1982 Bulletin 3(10). 1983 Bulletin 4(1). Rene Guyon Society 1982 T. O'Hara. ed. May. Los Angeles, Calif. Bulletin. Subcommittee on Select Education 1977 Sexual Exploitation of Children. Washington, D.C.: House of Representatives. 95th Congress, 1st Session. SOURCE: HUMAN ORGANIZATION, VOL. 43, NO. 1 SPRING 1984 She's a hard one to figure out - is she sympathetic or not to "pedophiles"? Do you see any errors in her article that should be corrected? What do YOU think? M. DOWNLOAD: https://annas-archive.org/md5/c2ee4f6690698a11d2ad9af400f4debe [@nonymouse] [Guardster] [Proxify] [Anonymisierungsdienst] |