Skip to content

Pity The Poor ‘Born That Way’ Pedophile!

There stands Mirjam Heine center stage. She smiles as the TED Talk audience greats her. But this is the wrong emotion. For she is here to tell us something horrible, something heartrending—something that should not be. (The video linked above was deleted was removed by the poster after it attracted too much negative attention. Two bootlegs have since appeared, as of this writing: one, two.)

She forces the smile into exile and begins to emote. Without a word her now sad eyes tell us she is feeling great pain. We want to share this pain.

She begins to speak. Each word seeps out softly. Her calculated poignancy is of a doctor telling a wife her husband is about to die.

“Let me you about Jonas…Jonas has a secret he can’t share with anyone. Not even with his best friend…He is just too afraid of anger, rejection, and repulsion.”

Heine does not cry, but she searches the eyes of the audience for the waterworks she so desperately wants to cause.

What is Jonas’s terrible secret?

He wants to diddle your kids.

Love Is Love

Heine reads her lines as if she is Juliet looking at Romeo’s corpse. She is heartbroken, and she wants you heartbroken too, over the awful truth that Jonas knows “that there will never be a loving and fulfilling partnership that he can enter. Because Jonas is a pedophile. He’s only attracted to female children between the ages of six and twelve years.”

The implication that Jonas ought to have a loving partnership that he can enter is unspoken. Love is love. Can we, as a society, bar this poor man, this good man, this pitiable soul from experiencing love?

Of course, Jonas’s love would have him dragging little girls behind the woodshed and providing them with loving experiences they weren’t biologically meant to have. But love is love, and isn’t love all you need?

Born That Way

Heine says—are you listening? pay attention here—that pedophilia is a “sexual orientation.” It is, she says, an unchangeable sexual orientation.

Heine claims “one to two percent” of men, or about 60 million men worldwide, are pedophiles. That’s a lot of folks who can never find love. There are so many child lovers that, she says, every audience members must know one. “Anybody can be born a pedophile.” Born.

Don’t confuse pedophilia with child molestation. “What percentage of child molesters are pedophiles?…Only twenty to thirty of all child molesters are pedophiles.” But that’s the wrong statistic. What we want is the percentage of pedophiles that molest children. Heine never tells us.

Here Come The Judge

The laws exploding across the West baring “discrimination” against “sexual orientation” apply. How can you discriminate against a pedophile when he applies for a job at the child care center? Pedophilia is an “orientation.” Science says so. Discrimination against “orientation” is illegal.

Hey, don’t worry. This pedophile says he’s never touched a child. He just has desires. He has no choice. Neither do you. You must hire him. You must also click here to read the rest.

16 thoughts on “Pity The Poor ‘Born That Way’ Pedophile! Leave a comment

  1. Some quotes from the presentation:

    ‘we haven’t found why it occurs, there are biological, social, and psychological factors’

    ‘pedophilia is an orientation [preference] and different from child abuse, which is always wrong and must be punished’ … ‘an unchangeable orientation’

    ‘1-2 percent of men are pedophiles’ … ‘studies: 20-30 percent of child molestors are pedophiles’
    – Chances are greater that each of us knows a pedophile that is keeping their orientation a secret than not knowing such a creature!

    Since 20-30 percent of child molestors are pedophiles, which dwarfs their overall occurrence in the population, doesn’t that indicate a conditional probability that a pedophile is highly likely to be an abuser? Isn’t there enough info presented to calculate the conditional probability of a pedophile’s likliehood of committing abuse? Do we need the presenter to figure that out for us??

    ‘how can we help Jonas to not act on his orientation; how can we stop sexual abuse’

    ‘social isolation is a primary association with being an abuser’ ‘isolating them increases their probability of committing abuse’

    MESSAGE: ‘We normal people should treat them with respect and include them, but keep them under control.’ Also, advocacy for a support program for pedophiles to help ensure they do not abuse children.

    Briggs misses the “don’t discriminate” point the speaker made — she was advocating a kind of support program to bring these people out and provide the kind of support that would help them prevent acting on their base impulses; Briggs turns this around as if she was endorsing a program that would facilitate child abuse! Doesn’t she have a valid point? Allowing the means to keep them in the open, and get some support, helps in a way analogous to what some groups provide for alcoholics — they’re identified and when they start to slip they’re helped to stay off the bottle.

    If there’s a program that identifies the unidentified pedophile in our midst, isn’t that a good thing?

    And if that program helps keep the pedophile from acting on their orientation, isn’t that a good thing?

    Isn’t that, basically, what we do with people with highly contagious diseases — identify and help them in a way that keeps them from infecting others. Yes. In extremes there are still leper colonies, for example.

    Perhaps that’s better than the current approach where we facilitate them acting on their inclinations by helping them keep their drives secret, making it easier for them to prowl among us — an approach that, partly, makes us co-conspirators in their abuses because by that approach we are the ones looking the other way and encouraging them to not seek help.

    SEEMS a lot of people, most apparently, got caught up in the speaker’s point of reference/personal perspective — a “bleeding heart” feeling sorry for the pedophile and wanting to help them become a more active member of society. The heartfelt concern for the humanity in the pedophile conceals a very valid appeal: Perhaps there’s a better way to safeguard children from pedophiles.

    Briggs assertion, “The implication that Jonas ought to have a loving partnership that he can enter is unspoken.” is totally false — the speaker explicitly rejected such a notion, with underage children, repeatedly.

    Examine her main points from a perspective along the lines of containing an epidemic and her key points boil down to a vaguely reference approach, apparently implemented and evaluated, that, apparently, works for keeping pedophiles from becoming child abusers far more effectively than the current passive approach of social isolation. Since the numbers shows that this population subset has a disproportionate probability of abusing children, isn’t the real question we should be asking, “Is the way she suggests really better at safeguarding children from this menace in our midst?” And if it is better, maybe its worth it to implement that more broadly?

    That’s a practical question — and parents among us ought to be interested in programs that make our children safer.

    There’s a moral question she posed, incompletely: The conditional probability, based on her numbers, is that maybe 10-15 percent of the pedophile population will abuse a child sexually. That’s way higher than the general population, but indicates that the vast majority of pedophiles (if the numbers are accurate) never abuse anyone. The Bible believers here will recall the biblical references about sin address behavior — is it thus morally correct for a majority of some sub-population be ostracized for something wrong some of their peers are associated with doing but which the vast majority of them will never do? There’s a whole debate on “works” vs “faith” to go with this.

    Jesus said something about a man looking at a women with lust, being guilty in their heart. That applied to straights and very likely no more or less than with pedophiles looking at some children. So that’s not really a means of justifying the special treatment.

    That’s a counter-perspective….

  2. So the argument is: ‘the way you are born is the way you must stay during your whole life’.

    People are born naked, so must not wear clothes for the rest of their life.

    People are born without knowing any language, so they must learn any language at all.

    People are born ignorant, …

    Completely daft argument, this ‘born this way’ argument.

  3. Ken —

    This is the beginning of a normalization process for that which we all know is evil and vile. The process is the Hegelian dialect in action.

  4. I think it is proper to have sympathy for someone struggling with pedophilia, just like with any other mental illness. If that person avoids acting on those urges, that is a very good thing. I suspect that some people might be able to change that orientation, but it can be very hard. Sympathy and support, accompanied by concern that the person might act on their urges, is appropriate.

    The idea that pedophilia is a choice is an over-generalization. It is often not a choice, it is a problem.

  5. “the biblical references about sin address behavior”

    Behavior includes internal acts–to entertain an immoral fantasy is a behavior and is a sin.

  6. ‘1-2 percent of men are pedophiles’ … ‘studies: 20-30 percent of child molestors are pedophiles’
    – Chances are greater that each of us knows a pedophile that is keeping their orientation a secret

    If pedophiles are keeping their orientation secret then how is it known that 1-2 percent of men are pedophiles?

    Since 20-30 percent of child molestors are pedophiles … doesn’t that indicate a conditional probability that a pedophile is highly likely to be an abuser?

    No. If 20-30 percent of red objects are florms, what is the percentage of florms that are red? 1%? 20%? 50%? 100%? All you know is that the set of red florms overlaps the set of red objects by 20-30 percent. The size of the set of red florms remains unknown and also the size of non-red florms. For that matter, the size of the set of red objects is unknown as well.

  7. Keep in mind that “conversion therapy” is illegal in many places. So there will be no legal means to help someone change preferences. None.

  8. Mactoul, your example presumes we have no information at all on what proportion of all objects are florms not on what proportion of all objects are red.

  9. Cricket chirps: presumes we have no information at all on what proportion …

    But you do? How? Certainly not from the video. The numbers supplied for the population size of male pedophiles (1-2 percent) can at best be a crude guess given that a pedophile is unlikely to voluntarily reveal his inclination. In fact, it probably would remain a secret until being caught as a child molester.

    And when it comes to the proportion among child molesters who exactly is being counted as a child molester? At what age is a child no longer a child? That seems to vary by geographical area. As for pedophilia, is the DSM definition of below the age of puberty being used or something else? To some people, pedophilia is synonymous with child molestation– whatever “child” and “molestation” are supposed to mean.

    The numbers being flung about should be taken with a large block of salt.

  10. Yes, it might be a crude guess; it might be a vague feeling, but it’s not, as with florms, nothing. And it doesn’t lead to actual numbers being flung about, only tentative expressions like ‘a conditional probability that X is likely ( or even highly likely) to be Y.

  11. it might be a crude guess; it might be a vague feeling, but it’s not, as with florms, nothing. And it [leads to] tentative expressions like ‘a conditional probability that X is likely

    Sorry but unless it can be based on firmer things than guesses and vague feelings, it’s a pointless exercise — a what-if game. You can’t know at how many pedophiles within the population that haven’t acted upon their impulses. You only really know how many have been caught which tells you nothing.

  12. I like girls way more than I like women. I like women, but girls, absolutely melt my heart.
    The way she talks makes me uneasy. It’s too nice. She sounds like a little girl, herself.

    I wouldn’t want people to know I’m a pedophile, but since I know who is, I will naturally snake my way into prying something out of them.
    I’m not sure if it just gets worse the older I get. Because the more naive the person has to be in order to establish a connection with me.

    I did find a wife, and she’s wonderful.
    She was abused when she was 9. 9 years later, I met her. We don’t role play like that. At least, I don’t tell her I do. I always thought that maybe since I felt this way that the only way to fall in love was with someone who was still “stuck” at that age. I don’t know. Someone to grow up with.
    Or maybe at least it would counter act the damage. Or teach me a lesson about what this does to people.
    She was my 2nd girlfriend.

    I don’t know if I like any of this. Talking about pedophilia normalizes it. I’m afraid of myself, I’m afraid of predators manipulating the system, I’m afraid for my daughter.
    Is this completely anonymous? Because it says that people will know who they are? It sounds good. But what is it going to do? except bring up unrealistic fantasies? consensual or not; negative or not. Am I supposed to talk about this? spell it out? while the government records me? I don’t know if I like being held by the balls that much.

    I hate this so much, that if I didn’t have my daughter, I’d probably risk my life joining a gang.

    This is my fault. I remember making the first conscious choice to think about a girl at night.
    Sometimes I’m convinced the rest of the world is just lying; everyone must like girls and if they’re female, wants to be treated like one. It’s worked for everyone I’ve had sex with (only adults btw. my wife, the youngest of which).
    Like this must be an elaborate game of taboo and self restraint, where the only thing that helps is making friends & being with real people.

    And she looks like Sasha Grey.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *