Bitter Issues

Sosen is finally admitting they were affiliating with Nambla and yet they still can't even name them. Why is that? Is it because this is merely a desperate attempt to change their bad reputation and they know they must say SOMETHING but can't bring themselves to say that the RSOL - Reform Sex Offender Laws Campaign is the modern Nambla and WARN other sex offenders who may be taken in by them?

They seem to have a policy regarding covering up criminal activity and child endangerment. But we'll get to that in a moment.

First, someone - to use the famous words of Mary Duval - finally "educated their ignorance" as to the difference between age-of-consent laws and Romeo and Juliet laws, however when they say "We also oppose the prosecution of juvenile offenders as adults and their placement on the sex offender registry" and group that statement in with their explanation of their position on age of consent and Romeo crimes, I have to ask - is this ALL juvenile offenders or only those who had "consensual" sex with their similar aged girlfriends? Does it include people like David P. Hoffman who molested 46 boys ages 2 to 16, and 10 girls ages 4 to 16 from the time Hoffman was 10 to 18 years old? Does it include people like Anthony Cantu who molested a 7 year old boy when he was 15, treated as a juvenile he went on to molest a 3 year old boy when he was 17. STILL treated as a juvenile he couldn't be held could he? And now at the age of 21 there's a store security video of him trying to lead a 4 year old child out of a store. Does it include the original sex offender activist Joseph Duncan whose first recorded sex crime occurred when he was 15 years old? In that incident he raped a 9-year-old boy at gunpoint. He was sentenced as a juvenile and sent to Dyslin's Boys' ranch in Tacoma, where he told a therapist who was assigned to his case that he had bound and sexually assaulted six boys. He also told the therapist that he estimated that he had raped 13 younger boys by the time he was 16. But of course he had been tried as a juvenile so....there you have it.

Then we have this statement:

We are well aware that over 90% of the time sexual abuse occurs in the home in the form of intrafamilial sexual relationships.

This is absolutely a false and dangerously misleading statement. The pedo groups themselves tell us how they find their victims:

• My neighbor's kid
• My co-worker's kid
• My friend's kid
• My kid's friend
  

Etc.

Very few sex crimes against children are committed by strangers, of the remaining it is almost evenly divided between family and acquaintances. They have taken the statement than 90% of victims know their offender and extrapolated it on out into a blatant LIE. Furthermore the sexual exploitation of children is NOT "sexual relationships". It is abuse. There is an offender and there is a victim. So when they say:

We must educate the parents or those responsible for their care as to the real dangers.

I have to ask the question: Is this how they propose to "educate"? I won't even go into their recidivism tactics. Like Tom Madison said "It's Pillar Number One". They are very aware that the DOJ report they rely on does not give an accurate reflection. They are very aware that sexual recidivism is higher 3.5%. This is just another example of minimization on their part. They cannot be upfront and honest or their "Pillar Number One" would crumble. Their mission is based on lies and misinformation. When they can step up and admit that there are sex offenders who are dangerous, who need to be monitored, who should never be allowed out of prison, that parents deserve to have the knowledge that someone they know has molested children in order to make an informed decision about affiliating with that person - and when they recognize the devastating effect of sexual abuse, then and only then can they in any way be considered legitimate.

Now - it's what comes next that's the real problem:

We must find a balance by which the psychiatric community has a degree of freedom in deciding to bring law enforcement into a matter.

They are trying to (among other things) rename child molesters. Now they are simply "people who need help".

Would you prefer that a child continues to be abused because a person desiring help is too fearful of prosecution to ask for such help?

They don't ask for help. They don't WANT help. Here's the part they don't understand:

THEY LIKE IT.

They say they need help after they've been caught. I actually saw some weirdo in Prison Talk claiming to be a therapist and saying that according to mandatory reporting laws if the client didn't tell her the victims name then she didn't have to report them. I don't think I need to explain to you why that's incorrect. Furthermore The Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers - ATSA has made it clear, Therapists are not investigators. That is not their role nor should they attempt to function as such. It is not up to them to decide who should or should not be prosecuted. Who are they accountable to?

What I would like to know is why Sosen believes that people who commit crimes against children should not be punished. I would like to know why they think the victim shouldn't be recognized and be able to get the help that THEY need as well. Why do child victims not deserve justice?

Now, let's think about this carefully. Sosen, Fred Berlin, Stop It Now! and people like them say that if we abolish mandatory reporting laws people will come forward and "get help" so they don't HAVE to rape babies any more. They also say that if victims know their offender won't be punished that THEY will come forward as well. Now how in the world would something like that work you might ask? Well if their theory was correct you'd have to have broad education wouldn't you? Wouldn't people have to KNOW that they wouldn't be prosecuted? Would it be sort of like giving free reign to child molesters? Would it sound something like this?

Are you molesting your daughter? Are you a Boy Scout leader molesting little boys? Are you preying on your children's friends when they come for sleepovers? Never fear, you can tell us and you will NOT be prosecuted!

I imagine the campaign to "educate" would look something like this:

Children are NOT going to tell if they know the person raping them - the person in AUTHORITY over them is going to be allowed to stay in their home with them. They don't feel safe to begin with! They have been abused by someone they should be able to trust! They have been manipulated, threatened and deceived. They are CHILDREN. They are not adults in little bodies.

And again:

We must find a balance by which the psychiatric community has a degree of freedom in deciding to bring law enforcement into a matter.

Would that be someone like the guy whose letter was posted on RSOL?

Letter to the Editor of the RSOL Digest (March 2009)

I want to commend Kelly Piercy for pointing out the importance of words and expressing oneself clearly.

I must however take issue with some points in the discussion of
pedophilia.

Piercy also makes good points in distinguishing clinical pedophilia,
i.e, the sexual attraction to prepubescent children, from violent
predatory non-consensual sexual activity, and advocating for treatment. He then undoes a lot of that good by placing in the middle of his essay
"Pedophile = active dangerous person."
Someone who just skims the article is going to remember that. I think you could see what I mean if I were to write, apart from everything else:
¨Sex offender (registrant) = violent dangerous predator.¨
While a small few are dangerous, we all know that the great majority are not.

Furthermore, Piercy neglects to give the origin of the word "pedophilia" which comes from the Greek "paidos" = "love" and "philia" = "children," just about the farthest thing form an "active dangerous person" there can be.

If some are uncomfortable getting into the "age of consent" debate, take heart from Piercy's point about dialog. The reasons they are a bad idea can be explained to anyone willing to listen with an open mind, but more importantly, as Piercy points out, we just need to keep talking to each other, especially when we disagree.

Dr. Rick DeMasi

That's the Dr. DeMasi - in case you're wondering - who was a child psychiatrist and confessed to HIS psychiatrist

Dr. DeMasi was precise about his desires. He was a pedophile, he told Dr. Ingram, and made no apologies for it.

Dr. Ingram told no one. Dr. DeMasi went on to molest his own 10 year old patient and Dr. Ingram? Well, he got sued. And lost.

At that point, Dr. Ingram said, he stopped psychoanalyzing Dr. DeMasi -- and Dr. DeMasi ceased to be in psychoanalytic training -- because psychoanalysis and unrepentant pedophilia are incompatible. Dr. Ingram said that by mutual agreement, their sessions continued only as generalized therapy, and his goal was to challenge Dr. DeMasi's thinking, manage his stress and thus try to make sure he did not act on his desires.

But Dr. DeMasi continued to defend them, presenting Dr. Ingram with a dubious study that children were not badly hurt by sex with adults and with historical anecdotes about sex between men and boys in ancient Greece. Dr. Ingram seemed to consider this progress.

''I was pleased to see that he gradually became interested in research into the area of adults loving children from an academic perspective, that is, he was beginning to explore the literature of pedophilia in order to bolster his arguments with me, and, in so doing, was engaged in a legitimate academic pursuit,'' Dr. Ingram said in his deposition.

"adults loving children"???? I hate to break it to him but that's not "love". It's true "hate crimes".

Dr. DeMasi was stripped of his medical license, served five years in prison and was released in 1992. His history since then seems to illustrate the deeply ingrained nature of pedophilia, which many experts describe as a sexual orientation.

In 1994, as Dr. DeMasi fought a return to prison for violating his probation, The Daily News received complaints from residents in Bayside, Queens, that Dr. DeMasi was cruising the neighborhood in a van and introducing himself to boys as a child psychiatrist. The newspaper reported that Dr. DeMasi told acquaintances that he planned to go to another country, perhaps Thailand, that was less actively hostile to sex between adults and children. In August 1994, he disappeared.

Law enforcement officials located him in Mexico in 1995 and extradited him to Connecticut, where he completed his sentence and was released from prison, without any probation conditions, on April 3.

John R. Williams, one of Dr. DeMasi's former lawyers, said he no longer knows where Dr. DeMasi is, but hinted that Dr. DeMasi might leave the country again.

Yes, he did indeed leave the country. I know where he is if anyone needs him. In fact, now he's carrying out his garbage online - still saying the same things he said over 20 years ago.

But what about his then 10 year old victim?

He resists therapy because he cannot overcome his suspicion of doctors. In fact, distrust colors many of his interactions.

''For you people,'' he said, ''this is just another day at work. For me, it's another day in hell.''

The ultimate betrayals. A parent who abuses or fails to act on knowledge of abuse, pedophile priests and pedophile doctors - including doctors who fail to act on knowledge of abuse: ie Fred Berlin. Oh but we should grant the psychiatric community the ability to decide for themselves shouldn't we?

Sosen says:

NAMBLA members have also turned up in other legitimate SOL reform groups which causes confusion and outright disgust to many in the public forum.

But the truth is that Nambla CREATED one of the biggest sex offender groups there is on the internet. The RSOL. Say it. Just say it.

Sosen says:

Many groups spend all of their time focusing on former offenders, people who have admittedly made wrong decisions and broken laws.

I don't know what "group" that would be, we don't focus on offenders past crimes, we focus on offenders and enablers who are endangering children with pedospeak.

It is evident that the quest NAMBLA champions is one far removed from that of SOSEN.

That's not evident at all. What IS evident is that everything Tikibug - the COO - has said has been repetitious recitations of pedophile propaganda. You can't take bullshit and put frosting on it and make people believe it's cake. Well you can try, but you'll never even get someone to nibble on it when the smell knocks them down from 2500 feet away.

HT Jacey

Never Say Everything

Michael Melsheimer:

I have known Fred Berlin for more than 20 years. Do you know that he spoke against the reporting law in the state legislature of Maryland when it was first proposed in the late 80's? This was not a popular thing to do. I was with him when he did this.

Berlin says a lot of things publicly, so do people like ourselves. We never say everything.

shy guy:

NAMBLA was founded in late 1978 following a meeting of a group of gay community activists that had rallied to defend the Boston gay community against a media/legal attack by the local DA.

I should note that among the most influential early members was an anarchist ex-minister with a background of anti-war activism and writing as well as activism on economic justice issues

Michael Melsheimer of B4U-Act is the new breed of pedophile activist which attempts to ride the fence between what is acceptable (help pedophiles not offend) and a group of men who get together just to figure out ways to legalize boy raping. The name of his organization upsets the BoyChatters however. B4U-Act implies that Michael wants to help them NOT rape babies. This is unacceptable to the pedophiles. The truth is that Michael doesn't want to stop them at all. He merely wants to infest society with a bunch of crap. He wants the same thing he's always wanted. He just can't say it. He can't say it to us, he can't say it to the mental health community and he can't even tell the pedo groups that he's on their side. We'd find out if he did. He's sneaky that way.

Michael has found the way to sideswipe society he thinks. He's convinced the Baltimore Mental Health Community that he's something he's not. BoyChat doesn't know what to think of him and the Reform Sex Offender Law Campaign is loving him.

Follow along with some conversations from BoyChat. Some brand spanking new, some a little older. The language never changes but his mission is made clear - Nambla didn't work. We must try something new.

Michael Melsheimer:

B4U-ACT is doing great. I recently spoke with a person that had something to do with the starting of NAMBLA. He thought it looked good.

mvanhouten:

Does Maryland know you show your webpage to old NAMBLA founders for approval?

Does everyone who goes to LifeLine know that your goal for them is to 'eliminate offending?' Or is it your goal? And if it isn't, does Maryland know that too?

Oh what a tangled web we weave....

mvanhouten:

What exactly DID you acomplish? Your website still states your goal as 'eliminating offending'? How much offending do you think you eliminated (with the gracious help of this unnamed NAMBLA founder)?

Michael Melsheimer:

Your website still states your goal as 'eliminating offending'?

It certainly does not.

The term child molester is not in the B4U-ACT lexicon. We do have in our lexicon the term minor attracted person. B4U-ACT wants to work with any minor attracted person that seeks us out.

mvanhouten:

It's right on your site!
Here is a sentence from your report to Baltimore Mental Health Systems (22 June 2007)describing B4U-ACT's purposes:

"The report describes how improved communication would contribute to the prevention of offending, the prevention of harm to minor-attracted adults and adolescents, increased understanding by mental health professionals, and more effective and just policies."

But the question now is: why not just say it here too? Why deny it so adamently here at BoyChat? Because it's a lie you made to BMHS? Or, because you don't wish your potential clients here to know that is your goal?

Michael Melsheimer:

The report was dated 2007. It is part of our history, but the passage that offends you is no longer relevant to our site today. I can't change what is in our history and would be dishonest to try. It would be like BC editing their archives. Our site changed in December 2008 because of the statement you quoted.

Be assured you will find no current reference to prevention of offending. You can take that to the bank.

mvanhouten:

Why don't you post here and now that neither you nor B4U-ACT take a position on the appropriateness or inappropriateness of adult/minor intimacy?

Why not state that it is now NOT the goal of B4U-ACT to 'eliminate offending'?

Michael Melsheimer:

People sometimes say too much and destroy what they really want to do. I have already said a lot and don't want to say anymore.

mvanhouten:

Do you personally believe that any and all adult/minor sexual interaction qualifies as 'offending' and requires elimination?

Why can't you give straight answers to simple questions? It seems almost a pathology with you.

Michael Melsheimer:

People sometimes say too much and destroy what they really want to do. I have already said a lot and don't want to say anymore.

Fame:

There is something called "politics", it a game which MM must play.

As things progress the politics change. Soon the word "offending" won't be used at all in b4uacts rhetoric.

Further, sexual activity with minors is illegal. It is irrelevant (to this discussion) whether it should be legal or not, the bottom line is that it is and b4uact must work within that framework. Neither b4uact nor the psychological community not the BL community at large wishes BLs to commit crimes for which they may go to jail.

You need to understand this.....as well as rhetoric and politics.

Fame:

If MM declared a position on the appropriateness of sexual acts here it may alienate those he works with since he has now taken on an agenda which is not a part of his organization.

mvanhouten:

What state agency would knowingly give someone money if they knew the effort he was putting into Lifeline/BoyChat?

Michael Melsheimer:

It is important for the MAA community to have contacts in organizations like Stop it Now. They have great influence on the legislative process, and we need to know them and they need to know us. Some of the people that work for these organizations are not anti MAA. It serves our community well to find, know, and work with them

mvanhouten:

I am all for advocating people break the law, especially when it comes to mutually agreeable activities.

Michael Melsheimer:

I was on the Sally Jesse Raphael show years ago with a NAMBLA person..... He influenced my life tremendously. NAMBLA made a lot of mistakes, but they supported BL's almost before there was anything else. Tom O' Carroll, PIE fame, is also one of my heroes. His book, Paedophilia - The Radical Case, certainly opened my eyes up to a lot of things, just as my travels to SE Asia did.

mvanhouten:

I ultimatley want to undermine the labels "child" and "adult" so that people will evenutally see a relationship between a 9 and a 29 year old with at least the same lack of concern as a relationship betwen a 39 and a 69 year old.

Michael Melsheimer:

I think that you are right. We do have to go slow and not take on a radical agenda. We could all learn well by what happened to NAMBLA.

As it relates to building bridges, you are right again. There is nothing more important for our community to do. It is the only way we are ever going to be able to get any possible acceptance in the larger community for who we are as human being and what we feel is right for children

Michael Melsheimer:

My organization is not going to say to offend.

I am a BL without regret and will always be a BL without regret. My life as a bl has been terrific. No one could ever make me say otherwise. This is even considering that I spent time in prison.

Our line in the sand has historically defeated us. We need to think about a new one.

Michael Melsheimer:

We need to come together as a community. But there is another choir we need to preach to. That choir is the larger community, and it can help make all our dreams come true. Our problem is that they aren't singing our song . The major job in front of us is to get them to sing it.

We have to be very careful at first as to what we say and do, so we can say do and say more down the road. We need to build bridges and coalitions. This means that we might have to cool it for the moment. Please note that I said for the moment.

Will Robinson:

I am continually amazed at the political skills (evasiveness?) of this B4U-Act organization.

Michael Melsheimer has my vote as one of the smoothest operators I've ever beheld.

Is he a great leader or the new "Tricky Dick" of pedo-politics?

Richard Kramer:

As you may know, B4U-Act is promoting communication between minor-attracted people and mental health professionals. The purpose of these services is NOT to "cure" us of our attraction to minors--we do NOT believe we are sick.

It comes as no surprise to us at Absolute Zero that this was B4U-Act's goal, we've been saying this all along, yet Alex Marbury, the coordinator behind the "Reform Sex Offender Laws" campaign, embraces B4U-Act and even describes pedophilia as an "important discussion" to educate activists on the benevolence of pedophiles.

This is a campaign being supported by sex offenders activists claiming to be "reformed." Groups like SOSEN and individuals like Mary Duval. msdxe3ct78

Tumbling Down the Mountainside

We talked about Jim Freeman here and about pedophile denial of child pornography here. We also talked about Judith Levine using pedophiles for references.....one in particular - Lawrence Stanley - who not only claimed there was no child porn but was actively producing it himself. Aw well she must not have done her homework.

We've talked about Jim Freeman's RSO activism as the Executive Director of SoHopeful. We talked about his involvement in the "most sophisticated child pornography operation in recent memory" and which included "one of the largest digital seizures in the history of the FBI"

We felt sure the RSO advocacy groups would seize the opportunity to take stock, educate their members and clean house.

We watched and we listened.

We waited patiently. It never happened. Instead they attempted to cover it up, not only to the outside world but to their very own members as well. Perhaps they just didn't want their members to find out how that silly little "legal defense fund" yahoo group helped identify Jim in the first place. Or perhaps as we've previously seen "no more victims" is NOT their primary goal after all. For instance this is something they would never talk about:

"Experts have often wondered what proportion of men who download explicit sexual images of children also molest them. A new government study of convicted Internet offenders suggests that the number may be startlingly high: 85 percent of the offenders said they had committed acts of sexual abuse against minors, from inappropriate touching to rape."

Jill Levenson responded:

“It’s crucial to understand the sexual history of all these offenders, because sometimes the crime they were arrested for is the tip of the iceberg, and does not reflect their real patterns and interests”

This report having already been accepted for publication was withdrawn due to the concerns of certain people. People like Dr. Fred Berlin who claimed it may cause a backlash and intrude on a child molesters "individual liberty". Obviously he's not interested in the truth. No it looks to me like he's into coddling. It looks to me like someone should have been paying more attention to all those sex offenders who reoffended while they were in his treatment program. Or maybe all those priests he released that went right back to molesting children. He's Michael Melsheimer's mentor. And Freddie's mentor was good old Dr. John Money famous for trying to turn a boy into a girl with devastating consequences and who said in an interview in Paidika: The Journal of Paedophilia

If I were to see the case of a boy aged ten or eleven who's intensely erotically attracted toward a man in his twenties or thirties, if the relationship is totally mutual, and the bonding is genuinely totally mutual...then I would not call it pathological in any way

Paidika? Who in the world would want anything to do with that? Well, here's a few who have:

• Laurence A. Stanley - Thc Hysteria Over Child Pornography and Paedophilia
• Dr. Fritz Bernard - The Dutch Paedophile Emancipation Movement
  
• Peter Lambourn Wilson - Islamic Boy-love
• Dr. Rudiger Lautmann - Sexual Desire for Children
• Edward Brongersma - In Defense of Boy Love
• Theo Sandfort - The World is Bursting with Adults,so I'm always Glad to See a Little Girl

The usual and oft-quoted crowd:

• Hubert Kennedy
• Ralph Underwager
• Pat Califia

And the RSO favorite Hollida Wakefield:

You don't have good sex education in the schools, just these ridiculous prevention programs.

Couples are making their own pornographic movies. The comparison is on the one hand people running around making their own pornographic movies but on the other hand reacting hysterically to child sexuality issues

Given this schizophrenia and these hysterical attitudes about childhood sexuality, it's going to be difficult for paedophiles to appear more positive, to start saying they're not exploiters of children, that they love children, the sexual part included, even if it's a minor part

But what does that have to do with Jim Freeman? This is one time I'm going to let you figure it out for yourselves. I have a feeling only a few won't be able to.

From a conversation before Jim's fall:

Jim:

Being a pedophile does NOT mean the person has acted out. The "average adult", on the other hand, is sexually active. Thus they have "acted out", and will strive to do so again and again. So I STILL believe that a pedophile has more self-control than the average adult.

Response:

Whether a pedophile has 1 or 100 victims he is still out of control.

Jim:

Pedophiles with victims are not pedophiles. They're child molesters. What of the pedophiles who have not acted out?

Response:

I think we can both agree that any grooming is inappropriate and clearly out of control, no?

Jim:

Inappropriate, yes. Out of control, no. A person who is out of control can't at the same time have the patience of Job. You can fall tumbling down the mountainside, or you can slowly and methodically walk down, picking and choosing your path. The end result is the same, but you were out of control on one and in control on the other. You can't calmly, slowly and methodically tumble down the side of a mountain.

The following men in Jim's "greatest groups of pedos" - who didn't passively take a tumble have been sentenced. Half the men took plea deals and - got sweet deals - considering what they did. The one's who didn't, well take a look. Jim's sentencing is coming up in a couple of weeks by the way. Mark your calender - I understand he's going to be getting a sentencing enhancement under the Adam Walsh Act. I wonder if that means Life + 10 years? Betcha he's sweating bullets about now. Of course, if he had served his time and learned his lesson and just wanted to move on and wasn't dangerous and he wasn't a pedophile..............

PLEAD GUILTY

• Stepan Bondarenko aka "Bumhead" 38, of Philadelphia, Pa. - 20 years
• Erik Wayerski, 46, "Lerch" of Round Rock, Texas - 30 years
• Raymond Roy, 54, "Nimo" of San Juan Capistrano, Calif. - 30 years
• Ruble Keys, 55, "Crazy Horse" of Medford, Ore. - 17 years
• John Mosman, 46, "Pickleman" of Waterbury, Conn. - 13 years
• Warren Weber, 56, "Muad'Dib" of Boise, Idaho - 15 years
• Michael Berger, 33,"Box of Rocks" of Mechanicsville, Va. - 15 years

Went to Trial:

• Daniel Castleman aka "Chingachgook" 43, of Lubbock, Texas - LIFE
  
• Gary Lakey, 54, "Eggplant" of Anderson, Ind - LIFE
  
• Marvin Lambert, 33, "Methuselah" of Indianapolis, Ind. - LIFE
  
• Neville McGarity, 40, "Wraith" of Medina, Texas - LIFE
  
• Ronald White, 59, "RoadKill" of Burlington, N.C - LIFE

Not yet sentenced:

• Warren Mumpower, 63, "Lizzard" of Spokane, Wash - GUILTY
• James Freeman, 47, "Mystikal" of Santa Rosa Beach - GUILTY

Of these men Neville McGarity committed sexual assault of a child in 2003, Warren Mumpower had more than one sex crime conviction dating back to the early 1980's. And of course we already know about Jim Freeman, the registered sex offender and sex offender advocate who once told the Valigator:

My organization has done so much on the national level to shift the focus to the truly dangerous. An organization that you don't think too highly of. What's the deal?

Shifting focus? Well, he tried to anyway.