| |
News: Salon.com justifies pedophilia & defends pedophile - UPDATED
Member Since: 11/25/2011
Posts: 2,122
|
Salon.com justifies pedophilia & defends pedophile - UPDATED
Todd Nickerson of Salon.com publishes an article justifying and defending pedophiles like him, encouraging readers to see them as victims.
Quote:
I was born without my right hand. As a child, this deformity quickly set me apart from my peers. In public I wore a prosthesis, an intimidating object to other youngsters because of its resemblance to a pirate’s hook. Even so, I wore it every day; I felt inadequate without it. I was shy, uncoordinated and terrible at sports, all of which put me on the outs with other boys my age. But I was good at drawing and making up stories for my own entertainment, and I spent more and more time in my own head, being a space adventurer or monster wrangler or whatever character I could think up. These would ultimately prove to be useful skills, but for now they only served to further alienate me from other kids. On top of it all, I still struggled with bladder control—likely due to my heaping pile of insecurities, to which this problem only added more—well into my elementary school years.
But none of this would compare to the final insult the universe would deal me. I’ve been stuck with the most unfortunate of sexual orientations, a preference for a group of people who are legally, morally and psychologically unable to reciprocate my feelings and desires. It’s a curse of the first order, a completely unworkable sexuality, and it’s mine. Who am I? Nice to meet you. My name is Todd Nickerson, and I’m a pedophile. Does that surprise you? Yeah, not many of us are willing to share our story, for good reason. To confess a sexual attraction to children is to lay claim to the most reviled status on the planet, one that effectively ends any chance you have of living a normal life. Yet, I’m not the monster you think me to be. I’ve never touched a child sexually in my life and never will, nor do I use child ****ography.
But isn’t that the definition of a pedophile, you may ask, someone who molests kids? Not really. Although “pedophile” and “child molester” have often been used interchangeably in the media, and there is some overlap, at base, a pedophile is someone who’s sexually attracted to children. That’s it. There’s no inherent reason he must act on those desires with real children. Some pedophiles certainly do, but many of us don’t. Because the powerful taboo keeps us in hiding, it’s impossible to know how many non-offending pedophiles are out there, but signs indicate there are a lot of us, and too often we suffer in silence. That’s why I decided to speak up.
CONTINUE READING: Salon.com: "I’m a pedophile, but not a monster"
|
You can read more about this on the link provided on the title.
A week after this, he posted again:
Quote:
My article “I’m A Pedophile, But Not a Monster” was published last week and it has been a whirlwind since. I’ve spent days doing radio interviews, even an appearance on TV (HLN’s Dr. Drew on Call), but mainly just answering the hundreds of emails that have poured in. Yes, the vast majority of them have been supportive.
While there has been a visible backlash, predominantly from the political right, in private it has been a different story. This piece has generated debate and controversy all over the world, well beyond my wildest imaginings. When I first approached Salon with the idea, my editor was receptive, but throughout the process of refining the piece, she asked me if I really understood what I was getting into. Her concern was palpable. I assured her I did, which was mostly true; I had no idea it would blow up as quickly as it did, and the bigger it got, the more of a tempest it became. Even so, I have no regrets. I knew when I wrote it that it was going to be an important piece, something unique and necessary. And so it was.
First, the positives. Of the hundreds of emails I’ve received, somewhere on the order of 95 percent of them have been thoughtful and respectful. Interestingly, perhaps 70 percent of these have been from women, many of them survivors of abuse themselves, who have pointed out that my article has helped them understand the issue better and even to make some peace with their past. Here’s an example (and yes, I have her permission to reprint this):
“Having survived sex trafficking, molestation and rape all at the hands of people I knew and trusted starting at age six, I am a very aggressive defender. I was drugged and trafficked by my biological crackhead father as a young child. Yet I am compelled to thank you. For your honesty and bravery and not going the other extreme creating more victims. It took a lot of courage for me to come out with my pain, and as you have never made anyone else suffer at your hands, I respect your honesty and struggle.”
Most notes were from people thanking me for my willingness to shed light on a little-understood issue that few scholars or experts want to approach. A few people admitted to me their own secret attractions for children, how they felt alone and uncertain how to process their feelings. I directed them toward VirPed; membership growth, which has been fairly steady since I joined over a year ago, has swelled over the last few days. What really surprised me was how many women confessed pedophilic desires, which is often thought to be an exclusively male predisposition. Others have contacted me to work with them on anti-child abuse and pedophilia-related projects. All necessary steps toward what I set out to achieve: a bridge between the celibate pedophile community and the non-pedophile population, setting an example for pedophiles who may not realize they aren’t doomed to molest kids, and creating an environment where we can all work together to end child sexual abuse.
What I want to focus on now is the continuing misconceptions, prevailing fears and willful ignorance I’ve encountered because of this, both about pedophilia itself and about Virtuous Pedophiles as an organization. My experiences doing the Niall Boylan Show (Irish talk radio) and the Dr. Drew on Call TV show taught me that pedophilia is still largely a gut-level issue for a lot of people. One caller to the radio show said that she didn’t want to know what pedophiles think and lambasted the show itself for even giving me a platform. I told her that no problem was ever solved by refusing to understand the issue. We’ve been in that mode for a few decades now—has it fixed the tragedies of child abuse and child ****? Nope. If anything, this attitude has only increased the problem, since pedophiles at risk of offending are unlikely to seek help in this severely hostile environment. This caller fancied herself a reasonable person, but she decided this issue was beyond any reason. Unfortunately, this viewpoint is all too common.
Another point that arose on Dr. Drew was that pedophiles are by nature compulsive. This opinion comes from the extant data, almost all of which is based on people who’ve been arrested, since non-offending pedophiles tend not to self-identify or participate in studies. What do you think that data is going to show? Yes, criminals are often compulsive, but this data says little about people like me, who haven’t offended. This point should be obvious, but these kinds of statements demonstrate the dearth of levelheadedness when it comes to this issue. Logic gets chucked out the window. Dr. Drew himself even suggested that, because I was using hydrocodone, I might’ve abused kids without knowing it. First off, I never took more than two or three pills a day, well within what is generally prescribed, even though they weren’t being prescribed to me. I never blacked out or even came close to being out of touch with reality. I’m neither stupid nor a massive risk taker. And being a doctor, he should’ve known that opiates pretty much obliterate your libido anyway.
CONTINUE READING: I’m a pedophile, you’re the monsters
|
Continue reading on the link provided above.
Not them allowing him to post not once but twice. 
Here's additional information about this author (courtesy of Reddit). Read more on that link for the whole story:
Quote:
Todd Nickerson is a self-confessed pedophile. However, he maintains he has never had sexual contact with children and never will. This may very well be true. However, in looking into his past, I found some things which are troubling.
1) Todd Nickerson is currently in a group called Virtuous Pedophiles. Essentially, they are pedophiles who say they do not act on their urges. However, as late as 2005, Todd Nickerson was a moderator of annabelleigh.net, also known as girlchat or GC for short. Girlchat is a pedophile message board that is avowedly and often militantly "pro contact", that is, the board espouses sexual contact with minors.
The obvious question is, if Todd Nickerson was always a "no contact" pedophile, why would he moderate a pro-contact message board? It seems an odd commitment to make. Why would he help run a message board for pedophiles that openly espoused sexual contact with children? Here is an archived version of a post from 2005 in which Todd Nickerson confirms he is a board moderator of Girlchat. Note that "Markaba" is one of Todd Nickerson's well-known online pseudonyms.
https://archive.is/tbepb#selection-79.7-79.22
The post is quite long and is an interesting window into Todd Nickerson's thought process in 2005. One amazing aspect of this post is that Todd Nickerson doles out parenting advice and criticizes the parenting skills of others. Furthermore, in the same paragraph he talks about babysitting a 7 year old girl for 3 days, mostly without supervision:
"yet another issue with kids is that many parents just aren't doing their jobs, or they aren't doing it the right way. Yes, I do believe there is a right way to parent, even though I don't have kids. Alot of parents think that makes me arrogant, but I really don't give a rip. I've been around enough kids on a regular basis and for long enough durations to have experienced the essence of parenting. I had one (7-year-old) little girl in my care for 3 days once and without the benefit of a spouse (though my mom was on hand some of the time,) so yes, I do know what the experience of having a child living with you is like."
2) In another post in 2005, Todd Nickerson states that once the culture becomes "sexually open" then "healthy sexual relationships between adults and children would become the norm." And, in this same post, he states that in this future pedophile utopia that if a child and his or her parents were all okay with a pedophile moving into the house of and then sleeping in the same bedroom as the underage lover then "the law should not stand in the way." Here is a link to this the post. Warning: it contains a drawing of a young girl at the bottom that skirts into the territory of drawn ****ography:
https://archive.is/GJPyc
3) You might be wondering what Todd Nickerson thinks of girlchat - the pro-contact pedophile board - more recently. Well, on May 14th 2015, he posted the following:
"Welcome back, GC. I hope you all had some nice GMs while you were waiting for GC to return. I had a great one myself, but you'll have to join VP to read it.  "
( Edit: MarcusWilliamsII explains in the comments that "GM" is short for "girl moment". )
From the context, GC, that is, girlchat, must have been offline for a while and Todd Nickerson wanted to "welcome" it back. If Todd Nickerson genuinely wants to protect children from pedophiles, why would he "welcome back" a pro-contact pedophile board? Isn't that counter to his stated goal of not encouraging or enabling the sexual exploitation of children? I, for one, do not "welcome back" any message board that encourages pedophiles to act on their desires.
I have archived this post but I will not link to it for the following reason: this post also has a photo of a very young girl with photoshopped angel wings set against a starry sky. The girls legs are slightly open in the front and her underwear is clearly visible. The name "Markaba" (Todd Nickerson's online handle) is written in fancy font across the top of this image. I do not know the legal definition of child ****ography but I know it fits my definition of sexual exploitation of a child so I will not post the link. An open question is, who created this image? Was it Nickerson, who advertises his skills as a graphic artist? I do not know. Whoever created and posted that image, though, comes dangerously close to creating and distributing an image that I believe sexually exploits a child.
|
A comment on Daily Mail sums up what I feel about this and where this is heading:
Quote:
Sam Wender, London, United Kingdom:
This article disgusts me. I have always believed, judging by the way the liberal elite love to take on minority causes, that it was just a question of time before paedophile sob stories started coming out and we would be encouraged to see them as victims. This is slowly starting to happen in some television dramas and in the press. Eventually we will be told we have to accept their reprehensible disgusting way of life as 'normal'. And of course if we don't we'll be cast as bigots. Truly, when that day comes, we really will have reached rock bottom as a 'society'.
|
|
|
|
|
Banned
Member Since: 2/6/2012
Posts: 18,398
|
What the ****  Lock it up.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 2/2/2014
Posts: 2,507
|
That title cut off.
I feel like I just landed on some national pedo watchlist cause of this
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/18/2013
Posts: 10,487
|
The only thing i know about salon.com is that its a SJW site, i guess thats what they going for next, telling us "paedophiles are people too" 
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 9/16/2011
Posts: 50,981
|
Quote:
Originally posted by BeyoncéFlicks
Being a liberal news website, how is this person still not in jail? |
Quote:
|
I’ve never touched a child sexually in my life and never will, nor do I use child ****ography.
|
Did you even read the article that he posted? If we assume that he's telling the truth, then he has not broken any laws. Actions are illegal, not thoughts / preferences / identities.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/7/2015
Posts: 4,054
|
Quote:
|
the definition of a pedophile, you may ask, someone who molests kids? Not really. Although “pedophile” and “child molester” have often been used interchangeably in the media, and there is some overlap, at base, a pedophile is someone who’s sexually attracted to children. That’s it. There’s no inherent reason he must act on those desires with real children. Some pedophiles certainly do, but many of us don’t. Because the powerful taboo keeps us in hiding, it’s impossible to know how many non-offending pedophiles are out there, but signs indicate there are a lot of us, and too often we suffer in silence. That’s why I decided to speak up.
|
This is all true though. Just because he's a pedophile doesn't mean he acts on it or harms anyone.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/1/2014
Posts: 57,339
|
This was a really interesting read.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/1/2014
Posts: 887
|
I genuinely feel sorry for pedophiles, when they physically act on their sexual attraction to children that's when I'm disgusted.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/18/2013
Posts: 10,487
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Achilles.
Did you even read the article that he posted? If we assume that he's telling the truth, then he has not broken any laws. Actions are illegal, not thoughts / preferences / identities.
|
Nnnnnn hopefully you'll rethink this and edit
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 11/25/2011
Posts: 2,122
|
I can't at people defending it too, when they're giving people **** for crushing on Brooklyn Beckham.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 11/25/2011
Posts: 2,122
|
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/12/2012
Posts: 18,340
|
At least he hasn't done any crime.
|
|
|
|
Banned
Member Since: 3/15/2013
Posts: 8,388
|
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 3/6/2011
Posts: 7,176
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Revolution
This is all true though. Just because he's a pedophile doesn't mean he acts on it or harms anyone.
|
pretty much this.
I feel like people's emotional reaction to the topic keeps them from thinking logically,
- a pedophile is a not equal to a child molester
- people should be educated on the topic
- pedophiles should be provided more opportunity to mental health support
- child molesters should be punished but also treated (medication, therapy, etc)
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 4/10/2012
Posts: 14,915
|
I was gonna make this thread a while back but I asked the mods first and they said "no we don't want that here" 
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 11/28/2011
Posts: 27,495
|
He didnt touch anyone tho. So y'all are gonna police peoples thoughts now?
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 4/10/2012
Posts: 14,915
|
Quote:
Originally posted by James Maslow
At least he hasn't done any crime. |
Quote:
Originally posted by Revolution
This is all true though. Just because he's a pedophile doesn't mean he acts on it or harms anyone.
|
He used to be a member of a "pro-contact" pedophilia site (but claims he's now against it) and was also fired from Target bc someone contacted them and gave them some of his posts on the site where he bragged about how the good thing about working there was getting to look at so many "pretty little girls" all day. He's definitely not innocent and I would absolutely not trust him around children.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 5/7/2011
Posts: 4,209
|
Quote:
Originally posted by BeyoncéFlicks
I can't at people defending it too, when they're giving people **** for crushing on Brooklyn Beckham. |
Stop being dense.
No one in this thread or in that article is defending child abuse.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 5/7/2011
Posts: 4,209
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Bathomet
pretty much this.
I feel like people's emotional reaction to the topic keeps them from thinking logically,
- a pedophile is a not equal to a child molester
- people should be educated on the topic
- pedophiles should be provided more opportunity to mental health support
- child molesters should be punished but also treated (medication, therapy, etc)
|
There was a really interesting documentary on Channel 4 not that long ago on this topic.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 4/10/2012
Posts: 14,915
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Toya
He used to be a member of a "pro-contact" pedophilia site (but claims he's now against it) and was also fired from Target bc someone contacted them and gave them some of his posts on the site where he bragged about how the good thing about working there was getting to look at so many "pretty little girls" all day. He's definitely not innocent and I would absolutely not trust him around children.
|
And yes I know none of this means he's touched a child but I still can't imagine leaving a kid around him. I wouldn't.
|
|
|
|
|
|
