I believe that there is incontrovertible statistical evidence from some northern European countries, early modern Denmark for example, of regular prosecutions for sex with farm animals and almost none for homosexual acts (both being considered sodomy). Hence it would be easy to construct a fallaciously superficial argument that there was greater sexual interest in cows and pigs than boys. But prosecutions reflect an awareness of what is going on and a will to do something about it - active intolerance of a particular activity in fact. The history of pederasty in Europe during the 1410 years it was illegal in all the Christian parts shows extreme fluctuations in the level of this active intolerance even within individual countries. I haven't had time yet to come to grips with Malcolm's argument, so I don't feel able yet to comment on whether he is guilty of this fallacy or, if so, whether it is deliberate, ie. argued for with an axe to grind. But I don't doubt your conclusions. I fear most people don't understand quite how important they are in their full implications. www.amazon.com/dp/1481222112 |