Gay pedophilia accepted by Gay Activist Groups

This is from the paper written by Dr. Hall and Dr. Hall- which is mistakenly called by you- and Silhouette and others as 'the Mayo Clinic'.

Lets go with the actual quotes from that article:
http://www.abusewatch.net/pedophiles.pdf
A Profile of Pedophilia

Lets first of all deal with what is a pedophile- from the paper:

By diagnostic criteria of the
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders,
Fourth Edition, a pedophile is an individual who fantasizes
about, is sexually aroused by, or experiences sexual urges
toward prepubescent children (generally <13 years) for a
period of at least 6 months.

The point being that everytime that you claim that Liberace was a pedophile- and then quote from Dr. Hall's paper- you are contradicting yourself. Dr. Hall says that Liberace's involvement with a 17 year old young man is not pedophilia.

Another quote from Dr.'s Hall article:

Pedophilia, especially the exclusive type, may be best thought of as its
own category of sexual orientation, not something that is
superimposed on an existing heterosexual or homosexual
identity.29,43

What does this mean? It means that a heterosexual man might also be a pedophile- and he may be a pedophile of girls or boys- or both. I refer you to Jerry Sandusky

Now lets go with the quote that you gave:

Pedophiles are usually attracted to a particular age range and/or sex of child.

Research categorizes male pedophiles by whether they are attracted to only male children (homosexual pedophilia), female children (heterosexual pedophilia), or children from both sexes (bisexual pedophilia).

The percentage of homosexual pedophiles ranges from 9% to 40%, which is approximately 4 to 20 times higher than the rate of adult men attracted to other adult men (using a prevalence rate of adult homosexuality
of 2%-4%).

This finding does not imply that homosexuals
are more likely to molest children, just that a larger percentage of pedophiles are homosexual or bisexual in orientation to children.19

This is of course the passage the homophobes love to misinterpret.

Dr.'s Hall make it very clear to anyone who actually reads the article that they are not saying that homosexual are more likely to be pedophiles

What they are saying is that of pedophiles- the percentage of pedophiles who molest boys is a much larger percentage than of men who are attracted to men.

But this doesn't change the facts:

Most pedophiles are men who molest girls.

From the same article

Percentages of reported abuse:
Abused female child
69% (of all children abused under 6 years old)
75% (of all children abused 6-11 years old)
91% (of all children abused 12-17 years old)

Is that clear enough? Men abuse girls in vastly higher numbers than men abuse boys. But homophobes always- and only- express 'concern' about men who abuse boys- trying to paint them as homosexuals.

Which brings me back to my regular point:

Looking at the posts on these boards, homophobes post post after post about men abusing boys- which represent the vast minority of abuse victims. Which leads me a conclusion:

They either just don't care about girls- or they only post to stigmatize homosexuals. If anyone else can come up with any other explanation I haven't seen one.

Dr. Hall do indeed distinguish between hetero and homosexual pedophiles- and make a point that there is no relationship between whether or not a man is a heterosexual in his adult relationships- that heterosexual pedophilia only is labeling the gender of children the man is attracted to- not the gender of adults- if any he is attracted to(7% of all pedophiles are not attracted to any adults).

You have yet to show a single lie by me.

The facts remains- again according to Dr.'s Hall:

a) Everytime you call Liberace a pedophile for having sex with a 17 year old Dr.'s Hall say you are wrong. Now that you know it- if you quote Dr. Hall's again, and call Liberace again you will either be lying or you will be shown to be a hypocrite
b) Dr. Hall's specifically say This finding does not imply that homosexuals
are more likely to molest children,

- - - Updated - - -

I am afraid you are much more familiar with pedophilia organizations than I am.

Whatever that means.

 

LOL So sad you have to parrot a statement to you because you lack the ingenuity to come up with your own. Don't worry, its expected. I see you didn't answer the question either.

Sure you are. We believe you, no really. When the name calling starts everyone knows you've lost the argument.

Which of course is a lie. You claimed you condemn gay pedophilia not specifically what Liberace did until post 33. Why you lie like this is beyond rational thought when its so easy to disprove.

It was immediate. Lying about it doesn't help you. The only delay was proof of your claims of her age which you never provided. I even gave you the benifit of the doubt of your theory on her age and condemned it outright.

Which is another bald faced lie and I challenge you to provide my words where I excused it.

More lying I challenge you to provide my words where I excused it.

Because you provided zero absolutley zero evidence of your claims. Are you going to consistantly lie about what was said? Go ahead, prove me wrong. Cite the post where you provided links and evidence to your claims up to post 28. You never did but your dishonesty will never allow you to admit it.

That was the first time you actually used his name. You keep lying all you like but you never specifically condemned liberace until this post. If you are going to lie again and claim you did provide the quote before post #31 where you specifically used Liberace in the commendation.

More lies but please go ahead. I'll be happy to disprove them.

Of course what you just lied about was what that post was in response to. Your post I quoted:

I look forward to seeing Tex's thread on "Heterosexual pedophile Elvis accepted by Heterosexual activists"

So once again you lied about what was said. You brought up Elvis in a pathetic attempt to ignore the subject of the thread which was and is Liberace. What I said there was when a movie comes out about Elvis' personal life with Preceilla and your claims of the ages when they were sleeping together were proven I would absolutely condemn it. But this thread was about Liberace. Your lying about what the response was from and labeling it as an excuse when it isn't even the subject of the thread is beyond child like lying. It

You just lied again. This is unbelievable. You provided no link no source to any of the claims of Priscilla's actual words. I however provided the actual words from the boy Liberace assaulted.

And you just lied again. I provided the proof in the very first post from the boy himself.

Quote: "A lot of people would think of him as a child molester," said Marlow, who (at 16) was 47 years younger than Liberace when they were together. "He baited me with wealth and fame ... Today he would have been arrested for child endangerment."


This is really getting sad. You are provided the proof, you lie about what you have provided then you lie about what has been provided to you.

Which is a lie since you never even used Liberace's name until post 33. Go ahead, show us all the quote from you where you specifically condemned liberace's action by his name before post 33. You can't because you never did. Just add it to the list of lies you made

Not until post #33 when you actually used his name. Please stop lying.

And you lied again. Not only is it Pedophilia in many of the states where Liberace performed you just claimed you condemned him from pedophilia and in the same breath you claim it isn't pedophilia.

Would you please let us know what face we are addressing? Its hard to keep up when you keep changing your story.

Another lie and so easily proven.


Post #26.

And you have zero evidence Elvis was sleeping with her at 14. If he did he's a pedo as well.

Another one of your lies exposed. So sad but so predictable.

And this was Well before Post #33 when you actually condemned Liberace by name. The difference between us is I'm not still defending Liberace's pedophilia by claiming it doesn't exist despite being given the names of the states where he performed where it was illegal at 16.


Let's review. You lied about when you condemned Liberace by name which wasn't until post #33. You lied when you claimed I had not condemned Elvis by name when I did in post #26. You lied again when you said I denied Elvis' pedophilia by omitting the statement you made it was in response to about an Elvis movie. And you lied when you said you provided evidence of Preceilla's age when they were having sex when not a single link was posted by you to support your claims for the first 4 pages when you claimed you had.

I hope you review this and next time read before you accuse or make claims that are known to be false.

 

The only liar here is you.

 

True- it will take a few minutes to expose all of his lies, but I will be glad to do so.

 

SFJeff:

Oh I am just enjoying imitating a homophobe who thinks that posting half of his post in CAPS is so exciting. I may do more of it- I am thinking of posting every other words in CAPS, but I may not- I don't want to be charged with imitatating a Conservative.

the reply:

Then you lost the argument by your own admission in post #18

"you liberals"
"Typical liberal"

lets go to post #23

"Its sick but expected of liberals like yourself. "

though I think it was pretty obvious that you had 'lost' whatever argument you thought you had in post #1.

 

But you don't see the logic of it:

1. Even hardened criminals hate pedophiles, who have to be protected from the rest of the prison population.
2. Therefore, anyone who is against Pedophile Rights has the mind of a hardened criminal.

 

What you claimed in post #97
is why it took you until post 27 to specifically condemn Liberace after being beaten about it for pages.

And I pointed out that was a lie- showing that in Post#11 in the thread,
page 2

"I condemn it as strongly as I do Elvis' relationship with Priscilla."

I will point out that my quote in Post #11 I specifically refuted your assertion.

You now lie and claim that is a lie. Frankly your dishonesty about what I have posted- when anyone can go right to Post #11- is rather an astonishing disingenuity.


I condemned what Liberace did with this boy, in exactly the same way that I condemned what Elvis did with that girl.

I have consistantly condemned all pedophilia- but as you know- what Elvis did to Priscilla and what Liberace did to his boy toy is not pedophilia.

I still have not seen you condemn Elvis by name for his behavior.

 

Well lets review one more time okay?

In post #9 I pointed out that Elvis was involved with 16 year old Priscilla- oh and condemned all pedophilia.

In post #11 I said:
"I condemn it as strongly as I do Elvis' relationship with Priscilla."

In your next post #18- you don't mention Elvis at all.

In post #18 you excused Elvis by claiming:

#1 She didn't move in with him until she was 18 and the difference was 10 years. This is 47 years difference. How can you sit there and pretend there is a moral equivalent?

Hmmm no condemnation there.

In my next post(#21) once again I spell it out:
"Again- I condemn this exactly as strongly as I condemn what that 'freak' Elvis did to Priscilla. "

Your next post #22- no condemnation of Elvis.

#23 still no actual condemnation of Elvis- you just claim Priscilla was 18
Since she was 18 when she moved in I'm not seeing the connection slick. Where do you have it on authority they were sleeping together when she was 16 because I will call him a pedo if that is true.


My next post #25
Oh so the difference was 10 years....not 47 years.....explain the moral difference here?

Priscilla born May 24, 1945. She visited Elvis in summer of 1962- when she was 17- and that was where she first took amphetamines and sleeping pills to keep up with Elvis.

She moved into Graceland in March or April 1963- when she was 17 years old.

Your next post- 26- still no condemnation of Elvis- but rationalization of why Elvis was 'different'

Since no one is making a movie about Elvis, that would be non genius! LOL

And you have zero evidence Elvis was sleeping with her at 14. If he did he's a pedo as well.

Finally in post #28 this is as close as you come to condemning Elvis- without of course ever using his name:

"Then he was a pedo if it happened that young."

Were you refering to Elvis or Jerry Lee Lewis- unclear- but I will be generous and assume you meant Elvis.

I even gave you the benifit of the doubt of your theory on her age and condemned it outright

"Then he was a pedo if it happened that young."

This is what you consider 'condemning Elvis outright'?

And you have the nerve to claim I wasn't condemning Liberace?

LOL

 

Lets see in post #20, you excused Elvis's relationship with Priscilla,

Your quote:
#1 She didn't move in with him until she was 18 and the difference was 10 years. This is 47 years difference. How can you sit there and pretend there is a moral equivalent?

Post #23- your quote:
Since she was 18 when she moved in I'm not seeing the connection slick. Where do you have it on authority they were sleeping together when she was 16 because I will call him a pedo if that is true.

Post #26- your quote:
Since no one is making a movie about Elvis, that would be non genius! LOL

Three posts- 3 excuses why you weren't- and have never- called Elvis by the same terms you have called Liberace.

 

I never claimed that I had provided proof until then. I did point out that you never required 'any proof' to attack Liberace. I will point out again- that when I challenged you regarding Elvis you assumed that Priscilla was 18 without any proof that she was.

This is my quote that you responded to:
finally in post #28- your 'strong condemnation of Elvis- or Jerry Lee Lewis- you don't say who- consisted of this:

"Then he was a pedo if it happened that young."

then you call me a liar.

Well I will point out once again - you have yet to show where I have lied about a single fact.

 

In my first post of the subject- here is what I said:

Exactly. I condemn any pedophilia or any abuse of a child.

This young man was the same age that Priscilla Presley moved in with Elvis.

In that quote I didn't specifically condemn Liberace- it was a general quote where I condemned all pedophilia- which of course had nothing to do with Liberace.

In my second quote- responding to your quote:
Originally Posted by texmaster
Still not a single condemnation from any liberal in this thread about what this freak did to this child.

I condemn it as strongly as I do Elvis' relationship with Priscilla.

If you are unable to comprehend that I was referring to the unnamed freak in your post- which I assumed to be Liberace- then that is not my fault.

But since you seem to have some difficulty with this- I was specifically referring to Liberace.

Whom I named two lines later:

This wouldn't be selective outrage would it? Clearly not about sequins- since Elvis and Liberace both wore sequins

I then responded again in post #21 when responding to your post:

Again- I condemn this exactly as strongly as I condemn what that 'freak' Elvis did to Priscilla.

If you are unable to comprehend that I was referring to the unnamed freak in your post- which I assumed to be Liberace- then that is not my fault.

But since you seem to have some difficulty with this- I was specifically referring to Liberace.

Then in post #25 responding to your post : "this freak did to this boy"

Like I keep saying- I condemn what this 'freak' did, just as strongly as I condemn what that 'freak' Elvis did.

I will give you a clue- when I refer to 'freak'- I am refering to the same 'freak' you kept mentioning.

But since you seem to have some difficulty with this- I was specifically referring to Liberace.

 

I will just point out the delicious irony here.

According to this standard- you have never- ever- condemned Elvis for sexual involvement with 17 year old Priscilla.

You have never said by name- that Elvis was wrong- or was a pedophile- or a freak- or any of the terms you have used for Liberace and his behavior

Lets review:
Post#28
Then he was a pedo if it happened that young.

Your next reference:
Post #32
"I just did. Twice using your own example."
next reference #76
"Another liberal lie. I already condemned the relationship."

I cannot find a single post where you actually condemned Elvis by name for his sexual relationship with 17 year old Priscilla Presley.

IF you persist in claiming that since I didn't use Liberace's name all the times I condemned his relationship just as I do Elvis'-

then you are a hypocrite if you claim you have ever condemned Elvis' relationship- because you have never done so by name.

 

Lots of claims I was lying.

Not one attempt to actually demonstrate a single instance where I lied.

but then again- how could you?

 

Post #15

From Elvis and Me:

According to her account, Elvis told her that they had to wait until they were married before having intercourse. He said, "I'm not saying we can't do other things. It's just the actual encounter. I want to save it." Priscilla adds, "Fearful of not pleasing him&#8212;of destroying my image as his little girl&#8212;I resigned myself to the long wait. Instead of consummating our love in the usual way, he began teaching me other means of pleasing him. We had a strong connection, much of it sexual. The two of us created some exciting and wild times."

You are correct- i didn't provide a link- I provided the name of the book "Elvis and Me".

That you are unwilling or unable to check what I quoted on the internet doesn't make me a liar.

I provided Priscilla's words- just as you provided a quote from Liberace's boy toy. I have even provided a quote from him showing that he was 17 when he was involved with Liberace.

So why do you call me a liar again?

 

I have never condemned Liberace for pedophilia- that would just be idiotic.

I have condemned Liberace for having sex with a minor in the exact same way I condemn Elvis.

I am not aware of any states that call the crime 'pedophilia'- but according to the mental health manual- that is not pedophilia.

 

Show me again where you actually condemned Elvis by name?

What I see here is you saying there is no evidence that Elvis molested a child.

And then a qualified "If he did he's a pedo as well."

You think that is a condemnation- but then go ahead and say I hadn't condemned Liberace?

LOL

- - - Updated - - -

I think Lee made it far simpler- suffice it to say, that anyone who has read the thread can see the hypocrisy of Tex's posts in this thread.

 

I'd call that a major owning Jeff. Tex is a bold-faced liar, a hypocrite and merely feigns moral outrage just to slander gay people. Well done for exposing him.

 

First there is a difference between homosexual pedophiles and adult oriented homosexuals. I am just wondering how some people can't see it. Great majority of homosexual pedophiles are not sexually attracted towards adult men. The great majority of gays are not attracted towards prepubescent males. Similarly with heterosexuals.

Next a lot of people use here pedophilia for sex with children or as a legal term, which pedophilia isn't. Pedophilia is sexual and/or romantic attraction towards prepubescent or early pubescent children. A pedophile is a person with pedophilia. Using the term pedophilia for different things is misleading and it has negative effects. DSM-IV definition is pretty problematic, because it defines more than one thing under the same label. It groups together a sexual offender who has sexually abused children long enough, but is not predominantly attracted to children (such offenders exist and are commonly described in literature) and someone who is attracted to children, someone who fell in love with a child, who don't and doesn't want to abuse children, but who is distressed about his orientation (and who doesn't have anything specific in common with the first guy). However if the second guy wouldn't feel distressed by his orientation, he wouldn't be a pedophile by DSM-IV, altough most of the people would consider him pedophile. Unfortunately, there are a lot of studies about pedophilia that use such definition which makes them basically useless. (And unfortunately it seems that DSM-5 will have the same problems.)

Those, who say that pedophilia is a crime, I would ask to show me the law that says that. It's definitely not crime in the Czech republic, Slovakia, I didn't find it as a crime in UK law, Australian law, it's not a crime by the law of at least one US state (but I don't remember which one). All those countries consider sexual activities with people under certain age illegal, but non of them calls that pedophilia.

By the definition I gave sexual activity with children doesn't makes one a pedophile and also one doesn't have to participate in sexual activity with a child to be a pedophile. It's about who he feels attracted to, who he gets sexually aroused by, who he falls in love with etc. I think most of the pedophiles don't sexually abuse children. (But even the incidence of pedophilia is pretty unlear, there are estimates of wide range. So it's problematic how many pedophiles do something unless you have a representative sample which is about impossible to get.) Also definitely not all offenders of child sexual abuse are pedophiles by the definition I gave. For example Czech sexologist Weiss claims that 90 % of offenders he examine are not pedophiles. I've heard similar claims from more resources.

I think it's important to use the word pedophilia properly, using it meaning other things leads to prejudices about the people attracted to children. They can have devastating effect on pedophiles. Young people who find that they are attracted to children often refuse to admit it to themselves. So they don't think about in which situations they might have problems to control themselves or what they could cause if they had a sexual contact with a child. If they admit it, they often have depression, they may fear they might hurt a child, some of them can think they are expected to abuse children, they feel condemned by society regardless of what they do. If they feel they have problems controlling themselves, they are often afraid to seek help. I think if they had better information, it might prevent some cases of child sexual abuse. Also a lot of them get hurt by reaction of other people if they tell about their orientation to someone or if someone finds out. I know about teenager kicked of the house by his parents, about 17 years old boy whose mother screamed on them that she will kill him etc. Not for something they are or what they did but because of prejudices.

 

Because there's no need to. If it's true Elvis had sex with teenage girls, then he should've done jail time. But Elvis Aaron Presley is recognized for his music, not for the women he had sex with. Same way that 1980s singers George Michael and Boy George are known for their 1980s music, not for the fact that both George Michael and Boy George are gay drug junkies who did prison time for indecent exposure in a bathroom, drugs and assault & battery. With Wladziu Valentino Liberace however, the movie about him leaves out truth that Wladziu Valentino Liberace sexually abused a 16 year old boy and the gay/lesbian groups who hero worship people such as homosexual statutory rapist coward Harvey B. Milk see nothing wrong with what Wladziu Valentino Liberace did. Yes, California schools honoring homosexual statutory rapist coward Harvey B. Milk is worse but with Wladziu Valentino Liberace-he should've gone to prison for committing homosexual statutory rape on a 16/17 year old boy.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/05/22/kaitlynashley-hunt-anonymous-lesbian_n_3318291.html

It&#8216;s no surprise that Judy Peck Shepard, corrupt ex cop Greg Joseph Miraglia, Laramie Project, and Big Island Chronicle&#8216;s Tiffany Camille Edwards Hunt see nothing wrong with lesbian Kaitlyn Ashley Hunt committing sex abuse on a 14 year old girl in a public bathroom & are against this lesbian going to jail for what she did to this teenage girl-victim&#8217;s parents have been harassed for reporting this crime to police. Gay/lesbian groups are predictable and side with gays or in this case a lesbian no matter what wrong the gay/lesbian does. What's sad are the kids who are rallying for Kaitlyn Ashley Hunt sexually abusing a 14 year old in a public bathroom. But it's no surprise gay/lesbian groups see nothing wrong with this just as they see nothing wrong with Wladziu Valentino Liberace sexually abusing a 16/17 year old boy.

 

Well, Elvis is known for the women he was with, but if it's true Elvis had sex with teenage girls, then he should've done jail time for statutory rape. Elvis Aaron Presley has been dead since 1977. It's known fact that both George Michael and Boy George are gay drug junkies who did prison time for indecent exposure in a bathroom, drugs and assault & battery, but when you mention their names, people usually mention 1980s group Wham! & Culture Club & once in a while do you hear about both George Michael & Boy George being gay drug junkies.

People will agree that Wladziu Valentino Liberace's a talented pianist, but being a talented pianist doesn't change fact that Wladziu Valentino Liberace should've gone to prison for committing homosexual statutory rape on a 16/17 year old boy. If the 2013 movie with Michael Kirk Douglas starring as Liberace had been honest & admitted that Liberace committed sex abuse on a 16/17 year old boy, then it wouldn't be topic. But the problem is that the movie about Wladziu Valentino Liberace distorts and that is costar actor Matt Damon (Matthew Paige Damon) didn't even bother to interview Liberace's victim, but instead Hollywood distorted this part of Liberace's relationship when Wladziu Valentino Liberace did was homosexual statutory rape. No surprise from Hollywood as in 2008, the movie Milk with actor Sean Justin Penn playing Harvey B. Milk left out truth about Harvey B. Milk being a homosexual statutory rapist coward. Didn't see Milk and won't see Liberace (don't even have HBO), but when it comes to gay/lesbian topics, Hollywood gives 1/2 truth or even lies to support homosexual propaganda as they left out truths about who both Harvey B. Milk and now Wladziu Valentino Liberace were.

 

Yes, but Wladziu Valentino Liberace also took him to states where the legal age is 18, so yes, what he did was homosexual statutory rape. Yes, there are many states & nations where the age of consent is 16 or low as 13-but that's a bad idea. Wladziu Valentino Liberace did commit homosexual statutory rape on a 16/17 year old boy in other states and just because NV law says 16 doesn't change fact that NV law is wrong because age of consent should be 18. It's no surprise that gay/lesbian groups are apologists for gays who homolest teenage boys & personally I don't care that NV state law says it's 16 because consent age should be 18 & I see something wrong with gays sexually abusing pimply faced teenage boys. When it comes to straights, most men have interest in women who are in their 20s & 30s, not teenage girls who have not finished puberty. But gays often have interest in boys who are teenagers to men in early 20s (yes early 20s are legal) who are still pimply faced and look like teenagers. There's nothing you can tell me which changes view that there is something wrong with a gay who has interest in a teenage boy who didn't finish puberty. Finally gay/lesbian conduct are useless & best for gays/lesbians to be celibate until cure is found for gayism/lesbianism.

 

Its a continued rationalization for speculating that someone did something illegal- and only carrying when its a man having sex with another male.

 

We'll all pretend that GLAAD's history with NAMBLA, and MULTIPLE studies PROVING that homosexuals are pedophiles at a FAR HIGHER RATE than are HETERSEXUALS, all "don't exist".

And, of course, we'll all also pretend to be as IGNORANT of the HEALTH ISSUES of male homosexuality as the Gay Guevaras want us to be.