Date: June 15, 2020
I support the principle, that people should be allowed and encouraged to make public expressions, such as these…
…and here is why…
While I cannot vouch for the sincerity of every accounting like this, it is safe to say they do exist…and that they are no small part of what gets classified “child sexual abuse”.
It’s been years since I’ve delved deep into the studies…but it’s been known for years, that cases with “participating victims” [aka: they pursued, protected and wanted it], who were actually pleased to be involved, accounted for 30% or more of reported cases.
This caused a massive uproar when “The Rind Report” came out, because when paired with the percentage of “CSA survivors” who had indifference to the experience, it greatly dwarfs the remaining fraction, who were traumatized by their experience.
We’re talking about roughly two thirds who were either happy or passively content, as opposed to roughly a third who were really hurt by their experience.
Now…why is this?…
Personal opinion…”the powers that be” are more focused on inflicting control, exploitation and power over “perverted” people…than they are focused on rescuing kids in peril, who actually need to be rescued.
A large part of this control, exists in suppressing and dismissing the accounts of those who either found whatever they experienced to be great, or at worst, still not troubling at all.
This creates a distorted public view, on a vast amount of what gets labeled “child sexual abuse”…and it misleads the public into believing that kidnapping, rape and murder are the dominant actions, among those charged and/or convicted of CSA.
In fact, they are not.
It always bothers me to see the positive or indifferent voices censored, or hounded into the shadows…
…because their absence distorts the public dialogue, which further distorts public perception.
01) Bernie’s Advisor Actively Thwarting 3rd Parties To Court Billionaires & Tulsi Gets Huge Nomination
