Paedophilia. What’s not to like? It should be glorified. Why defend yourself against it? Let your appreciation for child-love out, that’s what I say. Think about it for two minutes. If we didn’t love children what would happen to the planet? It would die out. You can’t expect adult women, with their limited fertility, to keep popping children – other than as a supply for paedophiles, of course. No, young blood, that’s what we need.
Children are sexual creatures. They just are. I remember being sexual from a very early age. At least six, if not younger. Never did me any harm. And look at all the friendly uncles you get to meet. If we didn’t have friendly uncles as children how would we learn to suck up as adults? Sucking lessons are about the only useful thing we learn in life. Getting down on your knees and doing it for the man will get you through many job interviews later – and lead to those vital promotions to help you through life.
Or how about taking it up the arse? Don’t tell me that’s not useful. It teaches you humility for one. Without being regularly ass-fucked how would you learn how to give sexual pleasure to others without having any yourself? Plus, for women, it encourages you to support the general consensus that your body is a sort of penis-sheath: primarily intended to give pleasure rather than to receive it. Isn’t that the ultimate goal for womanhood: sacrifice? It’s empowering, enriching and fulfilling. And so fashionable in the current return of women to their womanly values.
And as for romance. Who says paedophilia is not romantic? It’s the classic older man/younger woman scenario. It teaches women yet again that older men always know best what you want and when you want it. It teaches us to depend on them, to defer to them, to be meek and mild – surely useful characteristics for any woman?
But what of boys who get their mentoring from paedophiles? Let’s not overlook them; let’s not be blinded by gender.
Like women, men can learn a lot on their knees – they too need to learn to take it from the man. They too will be shafted by life; might as well learn it sooner rather than later. Additionally, it gives men a useful insight into homosexuality (assuming our paedophile is a man) that can only help to round them out as people. Then when they meet homosexuals later in life, or become one themselves, they can make sense of their history in a way that men who have not been ‘molested’ (what a judgemental word!) cannot.
But the most important thing about paedophilia is that it helps the family stay together. And so many modern day critics bemoan the loss of the family values that used to make Britain great. Paedophilia, like incest, is predominantly carried out within the family. Indeed, so commonly do these two things go together that they are almost the same thing. Paedophilia = incest. Think how families benefit from this. Think of Josef Friztl who kept his daughter locked in the basement then fucked the progeny of his daughter. (Did he? I don’t think so. But who cares? He should have.)
He was anti-social, a little strange. Who else would have loved him? He was Teutonic, fierce, a disciplinarian, a man who had morals, standards. He was out of synch with modern life, which has no real appreciation of the nuclear family. Josef knew how to hold it together – paedophilia and incest. Fuck your daughter, lock her in the basement then fuck your grandchildren. It keeps the father firmly as head of the household and the women where they should be, in the basement practicing childcare. Everybody knows their role, and discipline is maintained. I cannot for the life of me see why people would object to that. Isn’t it what we all want; more discipline? A return to family values?
And where does this modern taste for ‘honesty’ get us, this ‘outing’ of child sex offenders? Disaffected children with a chip on their shoulders complaining about their priests, shopping their uncles, betraying the old family friend. How does that help the fabric of society? Families are broken up by these ‘truth’-spouting little madams with their accusations and their attention-seeking cries of ‘Abuse!’ Careers are ruined. Mothers put years and years of energy into maintaining the status quo in these families. Look at the most recent case of strangled little Stacey Lawrence and her suicidal ‘dad’ Darren Walker. There may have been ’sexual touching’, the police say. So what? What harm would that have done? In fact, had we not all had this politically correct nonsense about paedophilia in our heads, poor Darren might not have hung himself. Stacey’s mother meanwhile has candidly confessed that she did not believe he posed “any threat” to her daughter: “Stacey’s mum Roxanne said she had no reason to believe Walker would harm her.”
He had lived with her for some years. He was a long-term partner. Yes, “Walker had been cautioned over domestic violence against his estranged wife back in 2006 and may have a history of violence”, but why would that lead Stacey’s mum to wonder about him or whether he had any paedophile tendencies? Would it worry you if your partner had been a wife beater? Not at all. It’s manly, and he was probably provoked. After all, Josef Fritzl’s wife had no idea her kidnapped adult daughter was living with a brood of children in a basement complex extensive enough to support the life of four people for 24 years. Even when Josef kept turning up with abandoned children that had been “left on his doorstep” she still didn’t twig. You might be tempted to think this is naivety taken to ‘profoundly stupid’ or even ‘deliberately stupid when it suits her’ levels, but it isn’t. It’s loyalty. Good old-fashioned loyalty that more women would do well to emulate.
Women like Stacey’s mum. She realises that a history of violence is not an indicator of violence now, and that any paedophile tendencies are nothing to concern yourself over. As long as your child makes the right noises at the right times, seems normal, relax. Men, in particular, have been practicing paedophilia for a very long time and, in spite of modern distaste for it, they will go on practicing it for a long time to come.
Stacey’s mum is not to blame, and neither is Darren. Stacey’s mum knows the value of family. She knows having a man, a father-figure, is the most important thing in a child’s life (and it makes her feel good about herself as a woman) and a little paedophilia just strengthens the bond. After all, a family that sleeps together stays together. It is us, the prudish and censorious public, that creates disasters like this.
If we hadn’t been so ready to stand in judgement of poor Darren and his all-too-natural impulses, both he and little Stacey might be alive now. We should be ashamed, and poor Roxanne should be supported in her hour of need; she was only trying to keep her family together at all costs. You would have done the same. And probably do.
Paedophilia is biologically driven, an imperative men can’t resist. As girls mature earlier and earlier and wear more and more sexual clothing at younger ages how can we expect men to do differently? Girls want to be loved and they want to be taught about loving by knowledgeable men. Why do we punish men for doing what they do best? They have a wealth of sexual knowledge to share, love to give, and yet we deny them the youth and beauty of small children, lovely teenagers, pubescent nymphets who will never be that beautiful and unspoilt again. What woman does not want to look back on her childhood and say “I gave my virginity up to my Dad”, the man who loves her most, who wants the best for her?
I know I do.
Yes, I glorify paedophilia – and incest. It’s what the world needs. There should be more of us. More Darrens and more Roxannes. An end to this political correctness. An end to harsh judgements. Paedophilia is here to stay, and I, for one, welcome it. Especially if it helps me sell more books.
To subscribe to this blog, without divulging your email address, scroll down the page and you will find a button marked “Entries RSS” under Meta in the left hand sidebar. You can also sign up to follow comments here. Or you can simply post the following text into your RSS browser: http://www.chancery-is-god.com/?feed=rss2
A new fan who wants to know the background and history of DANNY? Then visit The DANNY ‘Wikipedia’
An ardent fan who has read the book/s and wants to ask awkward questions full of spoilers? Then come join The Dirty Club, the members-only site hosted by the author, for in-depth analysis and discussion of the books The Dirty Club.
Not yet discovered the wonder of The DANNY Quadrilogy? You can check out all the volumes currently in print at Poison Pixie where you can read an extract of Volume 1 for FREE! Or start your collection on Amazon here where you can also buy a ’sampler’, entitled CULT Fiction, containing an introduction to The DANNY Quadrilogy and an excerpt from Volume 1, for only £2.99.
You can also see me in person on my YouTube site (as well as DANNY’s various trailers and ads) here or you can see the same material on the Poison Pixie film site where you can also hear our Mr Scratchmann read his delightful comic verse in his podcasts.
Lastly, there is an independent DANNY Discussion Board run by fans, C Stone’s DANNY where your host, Jodie, will frighten you with her in-depth knowledge of DANNY, and offer to dissect it to an unhealthy and sleep-depriving degree long into the night.
were it not for pedophilia, we would not have as many porn stars.
btw, how come everyone in porn is instantly a star?
Very true, Zebrasnake. Your wisdom is Zen-like.
Should not a satiric reversal delight us with some novel insight, rather than beat us about the head with something that after four decades of repetition is now a tedious commonplace?
What next: a paean to the wonders of fascist train time-tabling?
“Four decades of repetition”, eh? Excellent. That’s the kind of insanely bold assertion I like. Someone who’s not afraid to put his money where his mouth is.
By my reckoning, even if only one single piece of “satiric reversal” a year was written, that would still mean there are 40 features lampooning paedophilia that I have not yet read. Perhaps you could give me a link or two?
Obviously I’ve missed this “tedious commonplace” fashion for satire on child abuse because I haven’t seen any. Unless, perhaps, at a push, you count the film Happiness. Only one I can think of that comes remotely near. So please DO tell us all where all this head beating is going on. Can’t wait to read those babies…
And when someone commits suicide over a train timetable I’ll be the first to do a nifty little satire on it.
‘Obviously I’ve missed this “tedious commonplace” fashion for satire on child abuse because I haven’t seen any.’
No, you are being criticised for thinking that you are offering satire, but actually offering a tedious commonplace. It is not the satires on paedophilia (as restrictively defined by you) that have been broadcast for four decades but the tedious commonplace ’sex is power.’
I don’t dispute your right to assert that commonplace in public but I do think it was done so much better by writers like Greer and Dworkin 30 or 40 years ago, ie, when the idea was not a commonplace. Greer’s essay ‘Sentimental Education’, collected in _The Madwoman’s Underclothes_ (1985) comes to mind as an example of satire on social issues affecting women which takes as its starting point the principle that sex is power. In it she suggests that abandoned or abused women think they must suffer in poverty but forget they always have the option of prostitution to pay the bills.
When you write a nifty little satire I am certain it will be recognised as such.
The blog is very specifically about paedophilia; it is not an argument for, or against, ’sex is power’. I’m sure your attempt to redefine it to fit an existing pigeon-hole makes it easier for you to dismiss it, but the blog deals far more with ‘ignorance is bliss’ than ’sex is power’.
As for Greer and Dworkin, neither of them are big on ‘the funnies’, as I recall. Nor did they write extensively on paedophilia, as opposed to the broader politics of sexism. The essay you mention not withstanding (I’m taking your word for it, not having read it), neither author was big on satire either. I think you would have had to explain to Dworkin what satire was.
But none of this alters the fact that even if the Flanagan & Allen of sexual politics had been writing regular side-splitting satires on paedophilia, it does not make it any less viable for me to offer my version. You must live in a very different world from me if outspoken explorations of child abuse – as opposed to tearful ‘reality’ victimisation scenarios – are “tediously commonplace”. Perhaps they seem “tediously commonplace” to you because you don’t want to hear them.
My satire was obviously a case of ‘the cap fitting’ for you – or you would not have taken such exception to it – but this does not alter its validity, nor diminish its power. The fact that you’re desperately trying to find any kind of tenuous precedent amongst female essayists, to deflect my attention from your discomfort and annoyance about what you see as an attack on (your) masculinity, shows that I have, indeed, written a nifty satire with “novel insight”, which could not possibly have been “done better” by Greer and Dworkin, since they make you feel a lot safer than I do.
Oh ffs! subject matter aside for a mo, satire is still being misunderstood i see. A piece of satire doesn’t have to be a gut busting laugh fest, there are numerous examples of this where the accuracy is so spot on it’s hard to tell…which is how i felt at the end of the first paragraph of your piece above. The second paragraph cleared the matter up though. I’ve often felt there’s a bit of reductio ad absurdum in good satire, to show how feckin ridiculous or flawed the object of the satire is- such as our cultures (as loved by weasle worded politicians)obsession with family values – taken to it’s logical conclusion in your piece
I’m sorry to concur with you Chancery (hank bukowski says i’ll want praise in return…like bollocks i do!)but there was new stuff in your pice – fresh perspectives. So if some feckers who mistake content for form,as they sometimes do with Danny itself, don’t get it, they can go away and grow up…or not.
Big sweaty kudos to zebrasnake for the porn stars being stars quip, innit!
Thank you, poof. Now there’s a sentence I never thought I’d write. And damn it if I haven’t just proved Hank Bukowski right………..