"A discussion group of about twenty people formed, hosted unofficially by a non-governmental organization. Participants included women who are incest and sex abuse survivors, NAMBLA members, anti-censorship and civil liberties activists, feminists, gay and lesbian people, health-care workers, church activists, peace and social justice activists, academics, and those who work with prisoners."
One of the first signatories on the "Call to Safeguard Our Children and Our Liberties" petition, was a man named Bob Chatelle (shown above), who's listed as a "writer & anti-censorship activist."
Let's take a look at some of the things Chatelle's been writing then, shall we?
From an article of his, titled "The Limits to Free Expression and the Problem of Child Pornography," Chatelle criticizes the gay community for taking a pro-active stance against the pedophile group NAMBLA saying:
Rather than speak out in defense of the falsely accused, we will waste our time insuring that the very few members of the North American man Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) will not be allowed to march in "our" parades. We will fight homophobia by promoting sexphobia -- which makes about as much sense as the Anti-Defamation League trying to fight anti-Semitism by promoting racism.I can't imagine what kind of person would expect that the gay community should have to defend pedophilia, but I guess it's the same kind of person who would also say something as sick as this:
The main idea is rather that children (and I mean the pre-pubescent) are free sexual agents. In child pornography, children are portrayed as willing and eager. This is the idea that people find threatening and wish to suppress. Any parent discovering that his or her child has engaged in sexual activity with an older person (including an older child) would much prefer to believe that the child had been coerced or seduced, and had not been a willing participant in the act.Chatelles defense of Child Pornography doesn't stop there:
Current legal approaches to the "problem" of child pornography err fundamentally in treating it not as the result of child abuse, but rather as a "cause." Law enforcement therefore ignores production and concentrates on possession, often resorting to entrapment. But materials must never be banned for "giving people ideas," no matter how heinous those ideas might be. A reasonable approach to the problem of child pornography would not involve the surrender of the fundamental rights of freedom of thought or freedom of expression. A rational approach would punish those who harm children, would limit restrictions on possession to cases of crime evidence, and would protect everyone's right to privacy -- "the right to be let alone," which "is indeed the beginning of all freedom."So according to Chatelle of Reform Sex Offender Laws, it shouldn't just be legal for perverts to posses photos of kids being sexually abused, exploited and humiliated - it's their right.
Chatelle describes NAMBLA's literature as "thoughtful, clearly reasoned, and provocative:"
I have examined some of the literature of a boy-lover organization, the constantly demonized NAMBLA. Much of their literature is thoughtful, clearly reasoned, and provocative -- at least if you limit the scope of their arguments to adolescents as opposed to children. While I disagree with NAMBLA on significant points (primarily their refusal to disavow categorically sexual activity between adults and prepubescents), most NAMBLA members are most certainly not the Monsters claimed by politicians and the media. Because NAMBLA emphasizes the necessity of consent, because it constantly warns of the dire consequences of violating age-of-consent laws, and because it provides a forum for discussion among boy lovers, I believe that NAMBLA has prevented far more instances of child abuse than it may have "caused."It seems Chatelle shares the same idea of prevention as other people we know. The backwards concept that literature which supports adult's sexually abusing children, somehow deters pedophiles from acting upon it.
In another portion of the article, he blames society for the damage child sexual abuse does:
Actual sexual coercion of children is dreadful--one of the most dreadful and frightening things that can happen to a child. The horror is compounded by the fact that our society is sexphobic and most children absorb this at a very early age. A child sexually coerced thus experiences that which he or she has been trained most to fear. In a less phobic society, there would be less sexual coercion, because all forms of consensual sex would be acceptable. And sexual coercion, when it did occur, would be less traumatic to the victim. Unfortunately, sexual coercion (like other forms of physical assault, including murder) will occur to some degree in any society. No amount of social engineering will ever eliminate forever the problem of evil.I wonder what kind of society Chatelle envisions where "all forms of consensual sex would be acceptable?"
Bob Chatelle is someone who has been involved with Reform Sex Offender Laws campaign since the late 90's, and even today, a decade after the original statement was published, Chatelle is still listed as a signatory. We look at writing like this with disgust at how someone can be so sorely lacking in ethics and any regard for the welfare for children, however the Reform Sex Offender Laws campaign have actually published an article ("Sexual Fascism in Progressive America") which references the above piece by Chatelle, and this is how they describe it:
See Bob Chatelle's excellent summaries of the impact of the child porn crusade on freedom of expression: Kiddie Porn Panic, 1993; Limits of Free expression & the Problem of Child Porn, 1997Excellent... says it all - doesn't it?