I had prepared a selection and analysis of clips featuring women and children. But just before the intended day for publication DailyMotion took umbrage at one (or more) of the clips I’d uploaded, and closed down my account. To add to my difficulties an outbreak of house-guests (who were otherwise most welcome) has deprived me of the time and computer access necessary for the finding of a new host for the videos, or for the writing of a replacement post.
In an attempt to make a silk purse out of this particular sow’s ear I’ve gone through some unfinished drafts for blog-essays and selected from them three passages that seem worth sharing.
As to those censored clips…
Maybe I should have foreseen trouble. I had originally found all seven clips on YouTube only for all but two of them to subsequently disappear. Clearly there was something about those clips that YouTube didn’t like.
I had planned to upload my copies of these clips to DailyMotion. A careful reading of their terms and conditions had reassured me that the clips should be fine – they contain no nudity or anything that would get the protagonists in trouble with the law. But of course, when it comes to questions of children and sensuality terms & conditions count for nothing –the decision to censor being taken on the basis of a mush of gut-reactions and a deluge of unthinking outrage.
I’d still like to share these clips with you – they are interesting on many levels – but I’ll have to find some host who has bothered to read their own terms and conditions and who is a little less trigger-happy with the ‘censor’ button.
Another possibility is to have the reader download these clips from a file-sharing facility – but I can imagine my esteemed readers feeling justifiably hesitant about downloading strange files containing material that YouTube and DailyMotion have deemed unacceptable…
Maybe readers with wise heads on such matters could advise me.
Anyway, enough waffle. Here are three unrelated musings – the first is some quasi-philosophical belly-aching provoked by a little girl pulling her tongue out at me, the second is on the label ‘Radical Paedophilia’, and the third are some things to keep in mind when telling or receiving secrets.
“La mer, la mer, toujours recommencee” from Le Cimetière Marin by Paul Valery
A few weeks ago, I was walking home through my local park, when a little girl of about nine, bored and killing time turning cartwheels, stopped her gymnastics and pulled out her tongue at me.
The way she did this was so filled with contempt and hostility that it left me shaken and humiliated. I’ve had little girls pull out their tongues at me many times and the gesture has always been flirtatious and ironical – accompanied by a smile, or a laugh, or a coy squirm – its overt rudeness concealing a deeper wish to engage with the gesture’s recipient.
But this one had none of this playfulness or charm. It seemed that this girl had taken an immediate dislike to me. Or she had maybe sensed my desire for her and not liked it.
I’d noticed her from a distance and had taken a slight detour in order to pass by her. Near to where she was playing were four or five men sat on a bench talking loudly. They appeared – how can I put this without seeming a snob? – disreputable, unsavoury? – taking loudly, swearing, smoking, empty beer cans scattered round them on the grass. Presumably one of the men was the girl’s father, or maybe an uncle.
The men ignored me. Nor did they notice the girl’s gesture, her back being turned toward them.
The girl was one of the ‘gypsy’ children that inhabit an encampment on the outskirts of the town. These children are often strikingly beautiful – though an increasing number of them are over-weight, or even obese.
Their beauty is offset by a sullen hostility when in the presence of the towns-people – outsiders to their community. Local teachers tell of their poor school-attendance (indeed this little scene occurred on a school day, during school hours), their frequently disruptive behaviour when present, and their parents’ hostility towards education.
The girl had a knowing look and exuded the farouche sensuality that Bizet’s Carmen might have had at that age. Something about her, and the men she was with, gave the impression that she was maybe already wise to the desires of men whose gaze lasts a fraction of a second too long, whose glance darts too readily to her revealed midriff as she turns her cartwheels….
When I got home I looked into the mirror to get some idea of what the girl had seen…and realised that if I’d been a wild beautiful little girl and I’d caught a stranger of my appearance looking at me lustfully I might have pulled out my tongue contemptuously too.
Paedophilia seems to be an inherently melancholic form of love. We are brief guests in the romping, creative, silly-serious, fun, optimistic world of childhood. I suspect that even in my dream world, my ‘paedotopia’ (!?), there would be no escaping the fact that my way of relating to children, the way we can make each other’s world ecstatic – does not survive into the ‘cool’ of adolescence.
Teleiophilia seems better adapted to the flow of time than paedophilia – though it too has its time-related dysfunctions: the seven-year itch and the dumping of aging partners for younger models.
A man in his sixties might find women in their twenties more visually and sexually appealing than those of his own age, but it is probable that an element of his desires and affections will have matured as he has aged, and that he will value the history and world-view that he and women of his generation share. There is also a kind of pragmatic resignation – a knowledge that one can always fall back on partners of one’s own age, who presumably are willing to make the same compromises as we are.
Paedophiles are more like the wavelets that break on a beach on a calm day – forever making sallies, venturing forth a few yards, only to be drawn back to where we began – falling in love with a child and, if we’re lucky, accompanying them for a few year before things fizzle out, only for us to return to loneliness, a little older and a little less able to find another child’s love…
Whilst a teleiophile in his or her 70s or 80s has many good reason to be interested in a partner of their own age, why would a girl of nine find a man deep into middle age attractive, when there are so many teenagers and young men around to catch her attention?
I remember a few summers ago playing in a hotel swimming pool with a little girl on the verge of puberty. The girl and I had been close right from her toddler-hood. In her early and mid-childhood, she’d sometimes tried to push the boundaries of intimacy with me (but being a friend to her parents, and temperamentally law-abiding, I never allowed things to stray beyond what her parents would be comfortable with).
The swimming pool was empty apart from myself, the girl and her parents. Then a youth of about 18, with a slim taught body, and luxuriant hair on his head instead of on his back, came into the pool area. My girl’s glance at him maybe only lasted a fraction of a second, but it was enough to tell me that if this youth had come into the pool and shown interest in her I would have been abandoned like the old, now-embarrassing teddy bear that I am.
But, despite the tone of the above, I don’t feel too much self-pity: I have had my day in the sun – when the little girls would flirt with me, play the coquettes and get over-excited when I would reciprocate their attention. I was once that attractive youth, effortlessly drawing glances from the little girls.
It’s a new challenge coming to terms with the fact that those whom I find attractive, and whom I am strongly disposed to love, no longer find me interesting or attractive, and indeed may even be inclined to take an instant dislike to me. I think it is a challenge from which I will have much to learn and discover.
I’ll end this gloomy screed as I started it, with a poem. Robert Herrick’s advice in ‘To the Virgins, to Make Much of Time’ is an eloquent warning to young lovers everywhere.
And especially to lovers of the young.
Gather ye rosebuds while ye may,
Old Time is still a-flying;
And this same flower that smiles today
To-morrow will be dying.
The glorious lamp of heaven, the sun,
The higher he’s a-getting,
The sooner will his race be run,
And nearer he’s to setting.
That age is best which is the first,
When youth and blood are warmer;
But being spent, the worse, and worst
Times still succeed the former.
Then be not coy, but use your time,
And, while ye may, go marry:
For having lost but once your prime,
You may forever tarry.
I have recently found myself using the term ‘Radical Paedophilia’ with increasing frequency when referring to the complex of ideas explored and espoused here, and on blogs such as HereticTOC, and on forums such as Visions of Alice, GirlChat and BoyChat.
I feel that there needs to be some label for those who adhere neither to VirPedery nor to the dominant narrative, and for the nexus of ideas that takes as given that children are sexual beings capable of making consent decisions, and that intimacy with adults is not inherently harmful to them. The label is, of course, a nod to the Tom O’Carroll’s book ‘Paedophilia: the Radical Case’.
Radical Paedophilia is a pioneer subject. It’s existence is known to few. There are no faculties or professors of Radical Paedophilia. As with the early history of many fields of knowledge – think Geology, Astronomy and photography – it is the ‘amateur’ (deriving from the Latin for ‘one who loves’) who is the true pioneer: the ‘specialists’, the professionals, are so profoundly mired in the false paradigms of the dominant narrative – their careers and reputations dependent on their toeing the line – that any advances they make can only take them further from the truth and deeper into the swamp of error.
Radical Paedophilia is also an occult subject: too fraught for any ‘normal’ person to be permitted an open view of it. You will rarely find it properly represented and articulated in the mainstream media. It is a Gorgon’s Head – only safe to contemplate via the distorting mirror of the dominant narrative, and, more recently, of VirPedery. But paradoxically this makes the intellectual world of Radical Paedophilia an exciting place: the more something is hidden the more there is that needs revealing.
New and interesting thinkers constantly emerge on various forums and social media, and in the comments sections of blogs, proposing, exploring and defending new ideas and perspectives.
Such is the ignorance and misinformation that any paedophile who has thought deeply about his or her experiences and feelings unthinkable becomes a pioneer – refusing to accept as true that which they know to be false, asserting their identity in the face of a deluge of error.
In 1944, towards the end of France’s occupation and the Second World War, Jean Paul Sartre wrote:
“Never were we freer than under the German occupation. We had lost all our rights, and first of all our right to speak. They insulted us to our faces every day – and we had to hold our tongues. They deported us en masse – as workers, as Jews, as political prisoners. Everywhere, — upon the walls, in the press, on the screen, — we found filthy and insipid images of ourselves which the oppressor wished to present to us. And because of all this, we were free.” – from “Paris alive: The Republic of Silence”
Sartre understood that Freedom is not a condition but an act. He understood that one is only ever truly free when one is fighting for one’s freedom. Any paedophile who does not buy into the stigma, who refuses to wear the monster mask, who dares to love – whether she or he is celibate or not, or whether that love is requited or unrequited, is fighting for their freedom.
Any paedophile who questions the stigma and the hate that is thrust upon them is a pioneer, a radical, a freedom-fighter.
Secrets – how to tell and how to keep them
Over the past few years circumstances had led me to come out to a couple of long-standing friends. These comings out, whilst far from disastrous, went sufficiently imperfectly for things to be ‘interesting’.
I drew on these experiences when drafting a ‘secrets’ supplement to ‘The Toybox: Coming Out & Staying In‘ which word-count prevented me from publishing. Here it is. Feel free to add to it (or indeed subtract from it):
Some guidelines for keeping another person’s secret
- The obvious one: don’t tell their secret (though there may be circumstances where you may have to – see 5 below).
If someone tells you something that you feel should be a secret, but without explicitly stating that it is a secret, treat it as one until that person tells you otherwise. Or till you find out that it is such common knowledge that it is nonsense to treat it as a secret.
Don’t tell (or hint to) anyone that you either know a secret concerning a specific person, or even secrets in general. The best confidant is the person who seems to know nothing about anybody. Letting everyone know that you never open your ‘vault of secrets’ is not the best way of ensuring your vault’s security – it is better to give the impression that you don’t have, or need, a vault.
Secrets should remain secret even if you have fallen out with the person who confided in you, or if that person has disappeared from your life or even if he or she has died (but see 5 below).
Don’t, in a moment of anger, threaten to reveal a secret. A threat to reveal a secret is the half-way-house to betraying it: it casts doubts on your integrity and trustworthiness, and, in extreme circumstances, a threat of revelation may force the person who confided in you to preëmptively reveal their secret. However, if someone is threatening to betray you, it can be legitimate to remind them that you are in a position to betray them in return if sufficiently provoked. Being a good trustworthy confidant is one thing; being a doormat is another.
Even if a 3rd-party gives the impression of knowing your confidant’s secret, still act as if you know nothing about it. They may be bluffing in order to get you to confirm some suspicion, or to get more details out of you.
Some guidelines for sharing your own secrets
Granted that someone who was once a gossip can learn to be a good confidant, don’t be tempted to too readily forgive someone who has proven themself untrustworthy in the past. Someone who tells you other people’s secrets is likely to be untrustworthy with yours. Likewise mistrust someone who doesn’t divulge a secret, but who lets you know they hold a secret about someone – such persons are bursting to divulge what they know and generally need little encouragement to do so.
Evaluate the potential damage that can be done by a betrayal of trust by your confidant. If your secret could potentially land you a 20-year spell in jail – then confiding in anyone, even your most trusted friend, becomes a serious gamble.
An indicator of how trustworthy someone is likely to be is to observe how they handle being party to some embarrassing, but harmless, knowledge or experience concerning you, something that would be great fun and very tempting for them to spread around. Do they blab? Or do they treat the matter with discretion?
Generally, when one is considering ‘coming out’ to someone, it is because you suspect that they might be especially sympathetic or understanding of paedophilia. Note your potential confidant’s reaction and attitude when related issues arise naturally (such as when discussing current affairs, or if a Gary Glitter song plays on the jukebox).
Evaluate the stability of your relationship with your potential confidant. Is it a friendship that will fade once the circumstances that nurtured it change? And will this person continue to keep your secret if your friendship ceases to thrive? Whilst most people try to be trustworthy with the secrets of friends, far fewer are trustworthy with the secrets of ex-friends – the end of a friendship often being turbulent and accompanied by feelings of betrayal, bitterness and resentment that can fuel a desire for revenge.
Remember that by telling someone a secret you may be placing a great burden on their shoulders – don’t confide in someone who is not up to supporting that burden. Even if they prove themselves to be wholly trustworthy, the secret you tell them may excessively trouble them or damage your relationship.
Be prepared for your relationship with you confidant to change. Your secret will probably damage your relationship to a certain extent and you may subsequently need to make special efforts in repairing it and maintaining it. Be prepared to make sacrifices and compromises to keep the friendship healthy. Maybe most importantly: don’t rub your confidant’s face in your paedophilia. The main reason why we ‘come out’ is to be able to live and share our true identity. But, ironically, those whom we come out to may only stay our friends if we suppress this identity in their presence.
When telling someone a secret make sure that it is clear to your confidant – and yourself! – exactly which parts of what you’ve told them are secret and which aren’t. Also make sure they understand what your expectations are as to what it means ‘to keep a secret’ (e.g. the points in the ‘Some guidelines for keeping another person’s secret’ section above).
Control the flow of what you reveal and don’t get carried away by the exhilaration of confiding in someone. You don’t need to reveal everything. Keep secret what you don’t need to tell. Don’t overwhelm your confidant with everything but give them information a stage at a time. Allow him or her time to think about, discuss and digest a little at a time.
If the secret is sufficiently serious one (as it is in our case) and several people are party to that secret, don’t tell anyone that there are other confidants to that secret. Each confidant should think they are the only ones who know. This guarantees that your confidants are free from ‘guilt by association’ if one of them should betray you. Imagine a disgruntled friend who ‘outs’ you, and at the same time outs all the friends and family who are party to your secret, putting them in the firing-line of stigma, or worse.
Beware of being lured into confiding in someone simply because they have confided one of their secrets to you. Evaluate their trustworthiness on other criteria than their willingness to confide in you. Is it possible that the person has invented his secret in order to lure you into confiding yours?