Important Research Project
19 November 2007Kevin Brown (a trusted member of our community) and Dr Sarah Goode (a respected sociologist) are currently running a research project, with the intention of enabling society to understand people who are sexually attracted to minors. This study is important for us, as the anonymity it provides should lead to much participation from non-offenders, as opposed to the contact offenders who are usually sampled by researchers in unrepresentative prison studies.
You do not need to provide personally identifiable information for this study. Under-21s can now participate and will be included in a separate sample.
Fur further information, see http://www.maa-daily-lives.org/. Please participate if you are able to do so.
6 Responses to “Important Research Project”
November 19th, 2007 at 9:35 am
I will not doubt the honesty of the people carrying out the research, but I certainly doubt the honesty of the British authorities/government.
In my oppinion any results from the research are not likely to be used in favour of pedophiles, but against them, so if for example the research shows that pedophiles are more likely to “offend” by having access to the internet, you can be damn sure that a law will be passed to ban access to the internet to any pedophile.
Then having looked at the questions I have noticed that they are focusing in exclusively minor attracted pedophiles, but most pedophiles are actually bisexual and also feel attraction by adults.
I am still very pissed off that the British government is considering jailing people for looking CARTOONS, I am certainly not going to help those bastards (the British government) to understand anything, they can go to hell and burn in it trying to tackle “their problem”, because it is certainly “their problem” not mine.
November 19th, 2007 at 3:35 pm
Hi Zoraya,
This project has no connection to the British government. The University of Winchester is a private college, and the funding for this project is from private sources (connected to a grant for community-development related research).
The research was structured very carefully to not ask any questions that would elicit admissions of criminal activity, and this subject is dealt with at length in the Project Information Sheet (which serves as the informed consent for the project). So, your proposition that the research might determine that “pedophiles are more likely to ‘offend’ by having access to the internet” and result in some draconian law against us is NOT a possible outcome of this research.
I can understand why the research questions might lead you to conclude that the project is “focusing [….] exclusively [on] minor attracted pedophiles”, but this is not the intention of the project. I am forwarding your comment to the lead researcher, so that she is aware of that concern. To be honest, I don’t think any of us had thought about that, and it may be that the research team will want to ask follow-up questions (with those research participants who have agreed to opt-in for follow-up questions, which is most of the current participants) about the “exclusivity vs. adult and youth attracted” issue.
My own feeling is that we exist in a few different “bands” of youth vs. adult attracted. I have known pedophiles who appear to have a very small youth-attracted component to their sexual identity, and it appeared very disruptive to their lives to me (perhaps because they predominantly view themselves as “heterosexual” or “homosexual”, and the minor element of youth-attraction conflicts with their social or cultural values). I have known those who seem evenly split, those who seem to have some adult attraction and mostly youth-attraction in their identity, and those (like myself) who are excusively youth-attracted.
Your assertion that “most pedophiles are actually bisexual” may (or may not) be true, and is a matter-of-fact that this research hopes to establish.
I agree with your sentiment regarding criminalizing cartoons. We have no political rights, no involvement in the political process, and thus no means to affect the absurd laws being implemented to use against us. I have been affected by this process intimately; I have been physically assaulted three times in the past few years over my advocacy, the last time about four months or so ago, and the authorities here refuse to prosecute those involved in the violence against me.
Our governments lack legitimacy in their claim to jurisdiction over us. While I support diplomacy with those sovereign entities, you can be sure that I would not have any part of a research project being conducted by them.
Sincerely,
Kevin Brown
November 20th, 2007 at 5:24 am
I think I understand zoraya’s concerns.
While I’m aware that the government won’t become involved in the research, I am nervous about the way in which the mdeia may interpret - or rather portray - the results of the study. Thankfully, the questions appear to have been written in a way which will reduce the likelihood of this.
Despite my concern, I do feel that when one considers the fact that attitudes towards us are currently not improving, a small amount of bad publicity wouldn’t exactly be catastrophic. We don’t really have much to lose as regards PR.
We do have much to gain from this study, however.
One of the problems we face is that most studies designed to “understand paedophiles” use contact child sex offenders, often those convicted of multiple offences. This means that the professionals view all paedophiles (and ephebophiles) as child molesters and as people who can’t control themselves.
The study conducted by Sarah and Kevin will offer professionals a chance to gain a genuine understanding of paedophiles, rather than an “understanding” based upon the psychology of repeat contact child sex offenders.
November 23rd, 2007 at 2:15 pm
Thank you for the reply to all of you, I respect all your oppinions but I will not take part in the study because it is my believe that it is not pedophiles who should be studied but non pedophiles, someone should study the minds of newspapers editors like “The Sun” (most read in the UK) often calling for the death of pedophiles and inciting lynching mobs to hunt pedos.
Those journalist, and readers whom no doubt mostly agree with it, they are the ones who are screwed in the head, surely any decent persorn will not wish others any harm just because of their sexuality, and the state is complice of that because they would never allow it with homosexuals or blacks or muslims, not even 1% of the abuse that it is constantly hurled at pedos by press and government alike would ever be tolerate against anyone else.
My believe is that sexual therapists should carry out research on the repressed kind of people who want to lynch pedos, and work out why and how did they reach a stage where they found acceptable killing and discrimitating others because of their sexuality , this is the most urgent problem right now AFA.
PS:
When I did say that most pedophiles are bisexual I meant that they are attracted to minors and adults, this is not likely an academic definition of bisexuality, only my personal interpretation.
November 24th, 2007 at 4:57 pm
While I completely understand your frustration Zoraya (who could not?), and naturally we must each make our own decision as to whether to participate, I think it is important to note the potential (albeit abstract) benefits of this study.
Politicians and other vested interests attempt to suppress any study that conflicts with their anti-MAA and anti-youth-sexuality dogma (e.g. Rind et al, etc). The more academic studies there are out there, the more difficult this suppression becomes.
Also, the more frequently the issues of MAAs and youth-adult relationships are considered in such serious (i.e. academic) fora, the more there will exist the possibility of breaking down the current prevailing stereotypes, which are one of the primary means of dehumanizing MAAs and enabling our persecution.
Further, while a study such as the one currently considered will not - of itself - bring about change; the mere fact of the study’s existence will:
(a) enable it to be quoted by other academics; and
(b) may give other scholars the impetus to conduct similar studies.
Certainly we cannot expect one study to improve the day-to-day persecution that MAAs suffer, but the process of change is a slow one. It will never be initiated by the media (particularly the likes of the tabloids that you refer to, or even international disseminators of information such as the BBC or CNN). Any possibility for change, of which academics are a vital element, will take place in the margins. Consequently, I hope that MAAs will give serious consideration to the potential benefits of participating (a rare opportunity, indeed), in one such process.
February 28th, 2008 at 1:54 am
“someone should study the minds of newspapers editors like “The Sun” (most read in the UK) often calling for the death of pedophiles and inciting lynching mobs to hunt pedos.”
I was wondering if you could read an excerpt from the sun. If this is true, fuck them.