By Wardell B. Pomeroy
Critique by Punkerslut
After reading and criticizing Girls and Sex by the same author, I was interested in reading (and possibly criticizing) Boys and Sex. There are some parts in which both texts differ. It seems that in the later edited version of Girls and Sex (the third edition), there was a less critical view of Pedophilia -- whereas it was more stringent in the earliest edition. Asside from those few remarks made in this book, I must say that I agree with most of it, and I believe that it was written by a decent, humane person. Now, that I have that out of the way, on with the critique...
On the question of Pedophilia, in our society, there are an enormous amount of arguments opposed to Pedophilia. Some can argue that it is wrong because it is unnatural while others argue that it is wrong because young children are not capable of making an informed decision. Most, however, argue that the reason why Pedophilia is wrong, is because they believe -- consciously or unconsciously -- that it is always without consent, that it is the equivalent of child rape. The reasons for believing this vary. Often times, it is because of how we often hear of molestation, and it is equattable with rape, only the victim is a child. Some try to rationalize and philosophize this position beyond the point of what they are empirically given with news channels. In this spirit, some say that a child below a certain age is incapable of giving consent to any sexual act. Others say that a child is not capable of recognizing the risks of sexual behavior. Or, in the light in which Pomeroy developed his argument, many believe that when a child has sex with another, the child is always being taken advantage of. That is probably the most commonly accepted reason why Pedophilia is wrong, if not just social prejudice alone.
One can, philosophically, disprove these assertions. For instance, it has always been assumed by the cultural ethos of Western Civilization, even to this day, that when a man has sex with a woman, he is submitting her to his will. It becomes a power issue, almost a violence one. One could succesfully argue that every act of sex between a man and a woman, in this regard, was an exploiting one. Though it may be true of some instances of sex, it is not enough to condemn the entire idea of sex. About fifty to one hundred years ago, the idea of an interracial marriage was considered as a form of exploitation by the minority. One could succesfully draw a pattern between all these instances of alleged sexual exploitation and see that it is usually the oppressed class in each which is regarded as an exploiter. So it is with Pedophiles, who are regarded as sexual predators, simply because they have dissented from society in that one aspect. But, it is hardly true that African or Hispanic humans are desirous of "exploiting caucasion females." Similarly, I do not see how it could be true that Pedophiles are exploiting children. It may be true in some instances, I admit, just as it may be true of adults who have sexual encounters with each other.
Then there is the question of empiricism. The fact is, it may be true that Pedophiles are inherently cruel and brutal. Yet, no evidence has arrisen to prove this -- so, one may safely believe, on the grounds of logic, that there is no reason to believe this statement. The sex act between a child and adult does not intrinsically change from one between an adult and another adult. The same motions are applied. The same muscles are used. And the same emotions and feelings arise. There is no reason to believe that it is of a more exploitational nature. Furthermore, one must understand that children are as much victims of society as the Pedophiles are. They are deprived of a very valuable part of their lives, only to be liberated until age 18. There are some notable Pedophiles who have existed throughout history that have shown character that was not brutal or heartless. Alen Ginsberg, for example, has demonstrated a "love of boys." The founder of the North American Man-Boy Love Assocation (NAMBLA) signs all of his works with "For Liberation." Plus, NAMBLA was essential in establishing legislation that allowed political and social equality of gays. Unfortunately, few examples of good-hearted Pedophiles are known. Obviously, because it is a social sin, that must be kept secret by all who engage in it.
Drugs and Sex
Since I have already answered these arguments of Pomeroy elsewhere, I shall quote those refutations I have already written...
As to whether drugs are destructive of general health (physical and mental), it appears that Pomeroy makes no comment. Though there is one field that he does make a comment on: the effect of drugs on sex. In regards to Cocaine and Methamphetamine, it is quite clear that the effect can be either heightened or decreased increase in sex. The Erowid Vaults mention one of the positive effects of Methamphetamine to be "Increased sexuality." [www.erowid.org] The drug Lysergic Acid Amides (LSA) is categorized as a sedative, in the same group as alcohol, with mild hallucinogenic effects -- yet my personal use of this drug has given me that conviction that it can cause your sex drive to reach absurd, ridiculous heights. Psychedelic drugs have the majestic effect of turning sex (like every other act) into something supremely spiritual. As Pomeroy writes in his book, once an orgasm in sex is accomplished, a soothing, peaceful feeling overtakes the individual. Under the influence of psychedelic drugs, there is so much depth in meaning added to the experience. In particular, I can vouch for usage of Salvia Divinorum as a spiritual enhancement to sex (the enhancement lasting for approximately a week). Users also report that LSD has a similar effect on sex. The fact that drugs can aid in sex life has finally been recognized by pharmaceutical companies with their release of the drug Viagra, among other drugs used for "sex enhancement." And though it is true that sex exists by itself, fully and beautiful, "artificial help" (chemical help) can improve the results of sex, with increased pleasure, lowered inhibitions, and increased meaning, spirituality, and purpose. [Critique of "Girls and Sex," by Wardell B. Pomeroy, critiqued by Punkerslut, Saturday, November 8, 2003.]