1

Incest and Pedophilia Comin’ to Town

|

Many cultural critics argued that widespread approval of homoerotic acts and the legal revision of marriage to include non-marital relationships would inevitably lead to the erasure of other cultural taboos, specifically, taboos against plural relationships, consensual adult incest, and adult-minor sex, including pedophilia. Those critics who so warned were mocked by the scoffers who came following their own evil desires. “What rubes, paranoiacs, and bad thinkers,” screeched the scoffers. “Those are fearmongering, fallacious slippery slope, stupid arguments,” pontificated those with evil desires and strategies to match. But, once again, conservative critics were right.

The pro-poly movement is growing. News about “consensual non-monogamy” is everywhere including on mainstream news outlets. The American Psychological Association even has a task force composed of perverts to normalize this form of sexual deviance. Throuples and other sexually and numerically diverse unions are emerging from the dark fringes into the klieg lights that now highlight perversion.

Still in the dark fringy margins are the other two groups who, like polyamorists, have their own spanking new euphemistic names. Those who are in sexual relationships with close relatives have renamed incest “consanguinamory.” Following the logic of the “love is love” crowd, the blog “Full Marriage Equality” is dedicated to

“Advocating for the right of consenting adults to share and enjoy love, sex, residence, and marriage without limits on the gender, number, or relation of partners.”

Another blog that promotes incest is “Consanguinamory” whose creator, “Jane Doe,” describes her experience with and support for incest:

I am a woman in my early 30s, I used to be in a relationship with my dad on and off for a few years from when I was almost 20 up until I was in my late 20s. It wasn’t [Genetic Sexual Attraction], just straightforward incest, and it was the most deep, beautiful and loving relationship I’ve ever had. …

I clearly remember the confusion I felt when I first began to see him that way, I knew that society said that incest is bad, sick, disgusting and profoundly wrong, and yet the idea didn’t feel even remotely like that to me, it felt so right. Truth is, I fell in love with him and I chose to go with my heart and not my head. … I knew it wasn’t a crush or a phase, I’d had these feelings for a little while, but long enough to know the difference. I knew that what we had together was something real, and something very special. We were able to talk to each other for hours and never run out of things to say, and at other times just a glance could say a million words. We just understood each other so well, in a way it probably would have been more weird NOT to pursue the relationship, because it was the natural extension of our very strong family bond. …

A few years ago my dad broke off the relationship with me, he was afraid of us getting caught out, and he also still felt that it was somehow wrong for us to be together. Yet I loved him and he loved me, both in the romantic sense of the word and as family. I’ve tried non-incest relationships and they just don’t feel right to me, half the bond is missing… the family aspect of the bond. …

I still miss him so much and hope one day he has a change of heart, because even after so much time I am still in love with him. I miss everything from us going on the supermarket run to falling asleep in his arms at night. He just wasn’t able to get over the taboo against incest, so despite the obvious strength of our feelings he could not stay with me. I’ve tried so hard to just get on with my life, but it still hurts knowing that our relationship wasn’t just viable, it would have been thriving if that ridiculous taboo hadn’t been there in the first place. (emphasis added)

As I have written many times, getting the term “sexual orientation” added to anti-discrimination policies and laws was a stroke of genius by the libertines among us. Now all they need do is recast all the diverse manifestations of sexual perversion as sexual orientations, and, abracadabra, they become legally protected categories. And so, we see Jane Doe writing, “consanguinamory is an orientation, not a perversion.”

Six years ago, senior correspondent at The Week, libertarian Damon Linker, warned libertarians and leftists that leftist arguments used to defend “gay marriage” will be used to defend incest “rights”:

Once a person, couple, or group of people make a sexual-partnership claim based on autonomy and consent, there is increasingly no basis on which to legally reject it. And once it becomes legally accepted, there is increasingly no basis on which to morally reject it. Which means that, sooner or later, incest is likely to be legal and morally accepted in the United States.

It’s not just incest that is going to be legalized. Oh no, incest is not at the bottom of the well of moral sewage. Pedophilia is comin’ to town soon.

The first step in eradicating taboos is to whitewash the morally repugnant act, getting rid of its icky connotations. So, pedophilia has been renamed. First it was renamed “intergenerational love” or “intergenerational intimacy,” and now it’s been renamed again. Now it’s “Minor Attraction.”

The next step was to distinguish attraction to children from acts with children—an important distinction to be sure— but it’s temporary.

Recently, philosophy and ethics professor from the State University of New York at Fredonia and author of the book Pedophilia and Adult-Child Sex: A Philosophical Analysis, Stephen Kershnar, got in hot water for arguing that he finds no justification for a “threshold” age of child below which sexual engagement with adults would be wrong. For example, Kershnar argues that society’s belief that there is something “deeply wrong” about an adult man having sex with a consenting 12-year-old girl is both “wrong” and a “mistake.”

To be clear, Kershnar is not arguing that sex between an adult and preteen is “wrong” and a “mistake.” He’s arguing that societal disapproval of such a sexual encounter is both wrong and a mistake.

From his sullied Ivory Tower, Kershnar continues with his morally untethered philosophical ruminations:

The notion that [sex is] wrong even with a one-year-old is not quite obvious to me.

Kershnar speculates that there are “evolutionary” advantages conferred on pedophilia, citing, among other things, studies showing that a “surprising number” of college age men show attraction to “prepubescent individuals, I assume, mostly girls.” What a cultural mess, Darwin created.

This is what happens when a society abandons God as the transcendent source of objective moral truth. Corrupt (and sometimes brilliant) minds devise intellectual rationalizations to justify virtually anything, buttressed by woefully unstable social “science” studies.

Just wait, the heartstrings-pulling anecdotes, young adult novels, graphic memoirs, and picture books about unjustly stigmatized love are comin’ down main street soon.

**Viewer Discretion is Advised**

Listen to this article read by Laurie:

https://staging.illinoisfamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/Incest-and-Pedophilia-Comin-to-Town.mp3



Leftists Canceling and Cannibalizing Their Own

|

In their pursuit of replacing culture with anti-culture, the spanking new 21st Century culture Reformers are going to be very busy. Rather than nailing 95 theses on a church door, they’re going to tear down 950,000 monuments and place names honoring imperfect and altogether yucky colorless people and replace them I guess with the names of perfect colorful people. This provides yet more evidence of the silliness of Barack Obama’s out-of-context quote, “the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.” It also provides evidence of the truth of Dr. Martin Luther King‘s use of the quote, first spoken by 19th Century pastor Theodore Parker:

Evil may so shape events that Caesar will occupy a palace and Christ a cross, but that same Christ will rise up and split history into A.D. and B.C., so that even the life of Caesar must be dated with [Christ’s] name. Yes, “the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.”

Neither Theodore Parker nor Dr. King was making the point that history moves always and ineluctably toward justice. They were making the point that ultimately Christ will redeem history. Christ has already won. It’s interesting that leftists have adopted BCE and CE in order to no longer refer to Christ. No matter, Christ still wins.

In the meantime, the devil roams the earth lying and destroying.

Now, after decades of canceling conservatives through a thousand tiny cuts and an occasional deep slash, the Reformers smell all that yummy human blood and are mercilessly cannibalizing their own.

The cannibals at the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art forced out their curator, Gary Garrels, “[c]onsidered one of the country’s most prominent curators,” for the sin of saying he “would not stop collecting work by white men lest the institution take part in ‘reverse discrimination.’” The cannibals leapt on him. First, he tried futilely to stop the attack by groveling, saying,

I want to offer my personal and sincere apology to every one of you. I realized almost as soon as I used the term ‘reverse discrimination’ that this is an offensive term and was an extremely poor choice of words on my part.

His groveling delayed their devouring by seconds. The Cannibal Reformers responded, yum yum eat ‘im up. He’s gone, baby, gone.

The Cannibal Reformers have been noshing on Lin-Manuel Miranda, the beloved leftist author of the beloved musical Hamilton, for being insufficiently Reformed.

Homosexual, slightly conservative and now former New York magazine writer Andrew Sullivan was nibbled on for writing in ways about the protests that “triggered” “sensitive junior editors.” He resigned before being eaten alive.

And on social media and in her former place of business, writer Bari Weiss, who describes herself as  “center left on most things … and … socially liberal,” was gnawed on mercilessly. When the Cannibal Reformers, with blood dripping from their ghoulish mouths, paused to catch their breath, Weiss fled and used her best weapon to try to stop the cannibalization. She wrote and posted a resignation letter that exposes the intolerant, bigoted, ideologically non-diverse work environment at the New York Times:

[T]he lessons that ought to have followed the [2016] election—lessons about the importance of understanding other Americans, the necessity of resisting tribalism, and the centrality of the free exchange of ideas to a democratic society—have not been learned. …

My own forays into Wrongthink have made me the subject of constant bullying by colleagues who disagree with my views. They have called me a Nazi and a racist. … Several colleagues perceived to be friendly with me were badgered by coworkers. My work and my character are openly demeaned. …  [S]ome coworkers insist I need to be rooted out if this company is to be a truly “inclusive” one, while others post ax emojis next to my name. Still other New York Times employees publicly smear me as a liar and a bigot on Twitter with no fear that harassing me will be met with appropriate action. They never are. …

[T]he truth is that intellectual curiosity—let alone risk-taking—is now a liability at The Times. … Online venom is excused so long as it is directed at the proper targets.

Weiss’s resignation echoes what leftist journalist Matt Taibbi wrote in June:

It feels liberating to say after years of tiptoeing around the fact, but the American left has lost its mind. It’s become a cowardly mob of upper-class social media addicts, Twitter Robespierres who move from discipline to discipline torching reputations and jobs with breathtaking casualness.

I worked with such Robespierres and experienced firsthand their bigotry and hypocrisy at Deerfield High School on Chicago’s North Shore. Ironically, some of the most vicious bullies were those who most vigorously claimed to honor all voices and to value diversity even as they promoted only one set of assumptions on how to think about race, sex, and erotic attraction. All views with which district oppressors disagreed were designated “hateful” and  their imperious judgments justified silencing—through bullying if necessary—all dissenting voices. While proclaiming that everyone should “Speak” their “Truth,” they ostracized anyone who expressed truths they hated.

Seeing the cannibals eating their own, ethics (or panic) seized 153 men and women who work in journalism, academia, and the arts—mostly leftists—and penned an open letter in Harpers in which they “raise their voices against” the “new set of moral attitudes and political commitments that tend to weaken our norms of open debate and toleration of differences in favor of ideological conformity.” The signatories include Margaret Atwood, Noam Chomsky, Todd Gitlin, Garry Kasparov, Damon Linker, Steven Pinker, Letty Cottin Pogrebin, Jonathan Rauch, J.K. Rowling, Salman Rushdie, Gloria Steinem, Randi Weingarten, Garry Wills, Matthew Yglesias, and Fareed Zakaria.

After first taking potshots at conservatives, as is their wont to do, they wrote this:

The free exchange of information and ideas, the lifeblood of a liberal society, is daily becoming more constricted. … [C]ensoriousness is … spreading more widely in our culture: an intolerance of opposing views, a vogue for public shaming and ostracism, and the tendency to dissolve complex policy issues in a blinding moral certainty. We uphold the value of robust and even caustic counter-speech from all quarters.

But it is now all too common to hear calls for swift and severe retribution in response to perceived transgressions of speech and thought. More troubling still, institutional leaders, in a spirit of panicked damage control, are delivering hasty and disproportionate punishments instead of considered reforms. Editors are fired for running controversial pieces; books are withdrawn for alleged inauthenticity; journalists are barred from writing on certain topics; professors are investigated for quoting works of literature in class; a researcher is fired for circulating a peer-reviewed academic study; and the heads of organizations are ousted for what are sometimes just clumsy mistakes. … the result has been to steadily narrow the boundaries of what can be said without the threat of reprisal. We are already paying the price in greater risk aversion among writers, artists, and journalists who fear for their livelihoods if they depart from the consensus, or even lack sufficient zeal in agreement.

This stifling atmosphere will ultimately harm the most vital causes of our time. The restriction of debate, whether by a repressive government or an intolerant society, invariably hurts those who lack power and makes everyone less capable of democratic participation.

Some of the most bloodthirsty cancel culture cannibals live and move and have their anti-being in the “trans” cult, and when Harry Potter author J.K. Rowling said men can’t be women, the Cannibal Reformers came for her with bared fangs and unsheathed drag queen talons. Fortunately, Rowling has an impenetrable armor made of gold bricks. Unfortunately, few Americans have such armor. Maybe AOC, Bernie, and Biden can provide some to each and every American—oh, and while they’re providing free stuff, I’d like my fair share: a Martha’s Vineyard mansion just like the Obamas’.

While this letter is a good start in undoing the damage done to the Republic by leftists, seeing the name of the president of the American Federation of Teachers, Randi Weingarten, undermines trust in the sincerity of the signatories in that teachers’ unions are at the forefront of leftist politicking, including using schools to advance their leftist ideology.

Not surprisingly, when the letter was published, the Cannibal Reformers lost what was left of their minds, beginning with Todd VanDerWerff, whose “trans” alter ego is “Emily” VanDerWerff. To be clear in the miasmic ontological fog created by the noxious exhalations of the “trans” cult, “Emily” is a biological man—forever.

He, like Harper’s letter signatory Matthew Yglesias, is a writer at Vox, and VanDerWerff laughably claimed that upon seeing Yglesias’ signature near the signature of J.K. Rowling, he felt “less safe working at Vox.” And the Cannibal Reformers were off and terrorizing.

Leftist stormtroopers unaccustomed to pushback kicked up a Twitter storm, and fearing for their professional lives, a handful of Harper’s letter signatories bailed. Three days later, a racist counter letter appeared, griping that many of the Harper’s letter signatories were “white, wealthy, and endowed with massive platforms.” Of course many were wealthy and endowed with massive platforms because only those with wealth and massive platforms can survive the Cannibal Reformers’ Purges.

What we need now is massive pushback against ideological Robespierres, storm troopers, and Cannibal Reformers. Don’t let their tactics intimidate you. Don’t be manipulated. Don’t be deceived. Don’t hold your fire. And don’t send your kids to their re-education camps.

Listen to this article read by Laurie:

https://staging.illinoisfamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Leftists-Canceling-and-Cannibalizing-Their-Own_audio.mp3

Please consider a gift to the Illinois Family Institute. As always, your gift to IFI is tax-deductible and greatly appreciated!

Click HERE to learn about supporting IFI on a monthly basis.