Monday, August 26, 2013

"Cross-Generational Lifestyle" is a Polite Way of Saying You Want to Have Sex With Kids: The Atlantic's David Goldberg Shares His Struggles With Pedophilia

I recently began recording the second season of the podcast series here on We Are Respectable Negroes. In our first conversation--which took place today--I learned that there are White Supremacists who are adopting black and brown children in order to study the particular ways of we colored folks. Once the White Supremacist adopted parents are done with these human lab rats, they are to be abandoned.

I was shocked by such a revelation: I should not have been surprised given the capacity which human beings have for evil.

Reading The Atlantic, I then came upon a confessional by David Goldberg about his struggles with (and subsequent arrest for) pedophilia. It is hot here in Chicago. The air is heavy. I desperately want and need a cold beer to chase my can of Coke. My mood is not a good one. In all, the climate and my need for drink have made me especially vulnerable to the dark and judgmental and intolerant part of my personality.

The last three paragraphs of David Goldberg's essay on his sexual attraction to children may have just pushed me over the edge:
I am not advocating the cross-generational lifestyle. In fact, there is never an instance when an adult should engage in sexual behavior with a child. But until we as a society learn that help for those who view child pornography is a far better alternative to incarceration, we are doomed to see the continued proliferation of this problem. Scientists don’t know for certain if there is a correlation between viewing child pornography and offending against children. Wouldn't it be nice to get pedophiles help before we find out for certain?
Despite my arrest, I am one of the lucky ones. Because I was arrested in Canada, I was only given a 90-day sentence. Had I been arrested in the U.S., I could have served many years with hardened criminals. My family and friends stood by since my arrest and love and accept me, despite my sexual flaws. 
How many millions of pedophiles throughout the world aren't as lucky as I? How many will never seek help, too scared of the legal and social consequences? How many will continue to create the demand that fuels a malicious child pornography market? Is locking them away for a while the answer? Will the day ever come when we, as a society, reach out and offer them the help they so desperately need?
I am not a psychologist or a clinician. Nor, am I an expert in human sexuality. To be sexually attracted to children in a society where such behavior is considered a crime must be a particular type of curse. Moreover, American popular culture and advertising sexualizes children by (often) presenting them as adults (see the beauty pageant phenomenon for girls). Alternatively, young adults are depicted and visually "framed" as children (see the company American Girl or J. Crew). The taboo is erotic. Sex sells.

Is pederasty (or a sexual attraction to the relatively young by those somewhat or much older) rooted in the same impulses as pedophilia? I do not know. I hope that there are some smart readers who can educate me by commenting on the subject.

David Goldberg's "I, Pedophile", also forces a moment of personal reflection. What of those folks, like myself, who in high school had older teachers sexually proposition them? I did not refuse because of any moral or ethical compunctions. I simply did not have the self-awareness to realize what was being offered.

Was I a "victim?"

What of the criminal sexualization of children and teens, as well as acts of pedophilia, that are under-reported both in suburban and urban communities?

David Goldberg's essay reminds me of a story told by a friend who is a counselor working with teen mothers in black "ghetto underclass" communities. If she is right, and I have no reason to doubt her experiences or training, no small number of teen mothers are impregnated by adults in the black and brown community. Some of those adults are older relatives. White rural, suburban, and "middle class" America has the same demons too. None of these communities want to have a public discussion about such a private shame.

Goldberg wants to be "The Woodsman". Neither Kevin Bacon's character nor David Goldberg are victims, per se. The real victims are the children. Even the most passive participants in the pedophile subculture are de facto supporting the sexual exploitation and abuse of the most vulnerable and innocent among us.

David Goldberg's use of the phrase "cross-generational" lifestyle to describe the sexual attraction of adults to children is a dodge. A truthful statement would be more direct and transparent: David Goldberg is sexually attracted to and wants to fuck have intercourse with kids.

Sexual orientation is a complex mix of nature and nurture. One can grant and accept that fact while still being deeply disturbed by the prospect of adults having sex with children. Attraction may not be physical action. But, it is a type of premeditation and animating force toward such a goal if the opportunity made itself available, or were made to be available by a given agent's action(s).

I find the notion of "thought crimes" to be intellectually objectionable. However, in reading Goldberg's explanation of his own desires--and the comments on his piece--I may have to make an exception.


Shady Grady said...

chauncey devega said...

Never knew of that movie. Thanks?

Shady Grady said...

That section of "Running Scared" is actually a subplot but it's the first thing that came to mind regarding the subject matter.

! said...

You haven't confused him with Jeffrey Goldberg, have you? Different dude. One might hope, very different dude.

chauncey devega said...

I thought you meant Jonah Goldberg...that would have been priceless if it were him--for different reasons.

No, David Goldberg. I did change the concluding paragraphs to clarify--I thought David Goldberg had also written for The Atlantic more than once, but I may have gotten him confused w. Salon.

Tim said...

You have made some excellent points and raised many interesting questions. There is a great deal to think about and potentially comment on here and I haven't read the whole essay, but this one thing that Goldberg said in the part quoted kind of jumped out:

"Scientists don’t know for certain if there is a correlation between viewing child pornography and offending against children."

The problem is, if the porn is of a photographic or video nature, then the very _making_ of the porn was the offense, or part of it, against at least the child(ren) in the porn. I don't think it works to say, "well, I didn't actually _do_ this stuff myself, so it's OK to look at the pictures. Works that can be produced purely by imagination and art(ifice), e.g., drawings or text may still be problematic but perhaps could be treated more leniently or allowed to some extent.

chauncey devega said...

The thought crimes issue is a tough one here. Is looking at child pornography itself criminal because the children are not of age to give consent and are not considered as having attained nonage (using the old English...why not?). What of adults and those 18 and older who pretend to be children for the purposes of creating legal child pornography?

There is so much wrong in the tone of Goldberg's essay that I feel dirty every time I think of the puzzle.

rikyrah said...

I was shocked by such a revelation: I should not have been surprised given the capacity which human beings have for evil.
you've been Black in America for longer than three days and can read our history.
I can't even believe that you wrote this.
the whole pedophile as victim thing?
uh no.

chauncey devega said...

Four days actually. Remember I am white 3 days out of the week. Call me naive, but that white supremacists would legally adopt black and brown kids just to abuse them seems like so much trouble and a betrayal of their white supremacist Aryan bonafides.

Shady Grady said...

Someone who is of age pretending to be underage is problematic but different strokes/different folks.

But when actual children are involved I think everyone involved should at the very least be behind bars for scores of years. I have zero patience for the whiny self-congratulatory tone of his column. A child can't consent. This is not new.

Ironically this was the sort of thing that people opposed to gay marriage claimed would happen. I think the fundamental moral question is consent and choice. Goldberg is a twisted sick f***, to put it politely and it's indeed unfortunate that he's not in prison.

eztalk said...

Pardon me, but where is your proof of your allegations about White Supremacists using children to study them? I dislike that group as much as any normal person would, but where is your proof? I see none, except this webcam shot of a TV program?