Trans professor is placed on leave after interview defending pedophiles

[PandorasMailbox]

Oh dear, how very sad.

Don't let them back in!

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10210713/Trans-professor-placed-leave-controversially-defending-pedophiles.html#comments

I assumed that Walker's position was highly nuanced and possibly not being reported wholly fairly but from that report I read:

They suggested pedophiles should be able to use childlike sex dolls to satisfy their urges and stop them from targeting actual children

Walker's PhD thesis, titled 'Understanding Resilience Strategies among Minor-Attracted Individuals' takes another shocking stance on the treatment of pedophilia, arguing that pedophiles should be permitted to view child pornography as a 'harm reduction technique' or 'form of therapy' to help pedophiles 'maintain abstinence from sexual contact with children.'

Gosh. But then I don't think advocates of queer theory should be allowed anywhere near any issue that involves safeguarding.

I agree @nauticant

I'm still stunned that people are now saying the quiet part out loud.

How does that saying go?

When people tell you who they are, believe them...

Bizarrely the good professor seems to be AFAB even if they/ them now.

So they are saying children should be abused to provide 'therapy' to paedophiles?

This is the person so many are defending the views of on the other thread.

Because the poor peados didn’t ask to be ‘sexually attracted’ to children and it must be so hard to have these urges and not use images of abuse or touch kids, but be unable to go to gp to get help for their ‘affliction’ because stigma. So we need ‘disease’ rebranding to help them cope with their urges.

Seemingly yes. Queer theory destroys safeguarding, and that's because the greatest virtue in the theory is to actively remove boundaries.

@Lovelyricepudding

So they are saying children should be abused to provide 'therapy' to paedophiles?

As long as it's high quality!

'Viewing 'engrossing and high-quality child pornography,' Walker argued, is a viable method to help those attracted to children 'maintain abstinence from sexual contact with children'

If you replace the phrase "child pornography" with "images of child sexual abuse" it makes it very much clearer what this professor is asking for as a form of "therapy".

They'll probably turn it into another gender soon.

Who the hell uses the phrase "child pornography" nowadays?
Advocating that men should be allowed to view images of child sexual abuse for the purpose of sexual gratification is beyond disrespectful to the victims of that abuse.

Where in that is there any understanding of the impact of these images being made and used has on the child victims.

In addition to creating an increased market for the abuse victim images making it likely more will be created causing more suffering.

There is sometimes the odd idea that viewing images is a victimless crime. But the victim is on the screen and it does ongoing damage to know the images are being circulated and used.

That is before getting started on the concept that abuse is likely to escalate over time and while some offenders remain abusers at one step removed others will become contact offenders. So abusing in more than one sphere.

@Lovelyricepudding

So they are saying children should be abused to provide 'therapy' to paedophiles?

This was my response too. I’m incredulous. And very 🤬

@Clymene

I wonder what Walker defines ‘high quality’ ‘child pornography’ to be?

Did viewing violent porn help Ted Bundy abstain from raping and killing women and children?

@verymiddleaged

Who the hell uses the phrase "child pornography" nowadays? Advocating that men should be allowed to view images of child sexual abuse for the purpose of sexual gratification is beyond disrespectful to the victims of that abuse.

Where in that is there any understanding of the impact of these images being made and used has on the child victims.

In addition to creating an increased market for the abuse victim images making it likely more will be created causing more suffering.

There is sometimes the odd idea that viewing images is a victimless crime. But the victim is on the screen and it does ongoing damage to know the images are being circulated and used.

That is before getting started on the concept that abuse is likely to escalate over time and while some offenders remain abusers at one step removed others will become contact offenders. So abusing in more than one sphere.

This person is arguing to let peadophiles have access to ‘child pornography’ to help them abstain from harming children.

Because those of us whose abuse was filmed for perverts doesn’t count when it comes to harming kids?

That is absolutely disgusting, recommending that creeps view images of child sexual abuse to “help the poor creeps MAPs feel better”.

To use a public position to push for child sexual abuse is awful. This is one of the situations where I actually do not believe in free speech.

I wonder if this person thought that their trans status would protect them?

"arguing that pedophiles should be permitted to view child pornography as a 'harm reduction technique' or 'form of therapy' to help pedophiles 'maintain abstinence from sexual contact with children."

wtf

So they are saying children should be abused to provide 'therapy' to paedophiles?

and that it's a good thing.

it's actually unbelievable

@AssassinatedBeauty

If you replace the phrase "child pornography" with "images of child sexual abuse" it makes it very much clearer what this professor is asking for as a form of "therapy".

And that is why so many women here are so fucking adament about the use of words, not bastardising them to allow some whitewashing of intent.

The problem is that all of this sounds good, if you don't think about what each individual sentence means. Why would ANYONE object to ANYTHING that reduces child sex abuse? Surely offering legal alternatives is a good thing? Only a mad woman person would object tothat. Or us bitches, to use the terminology from that other thread!

And then you think, hold on just a moment. Images of kids being abused involves kids being abused. So that legal 'fix' now means that some kids have to be legallly abused. What do we do? Round up all the kids that don't matter, that deserve it? What?

What the hell happened to logic, basic safeguarding and common sense?

Remember, many women here have been shouting about this for years. MNHQ has seen fit to permanently ban a few of them. The ideology is firmly entrenched and we have been, until so very recently, resolutely on the wrong side of history for our views.

We MUST keep on talking about this, highlighting the reality of the isses raised in real life as often as we can!

I think I am now off to wreck my social media presence...

The professor advocated for the use of child pornography as a form of therapy? What the hell?

It baffles me how calling them "minor attracted persons" destigmatises anyone. It spells out how warped and sleazy they are in plain English.

Surely, with other things, seeing more of something makes you want more of it. If you want to give something up, you avoid coming into contact with it.

Oh dear. I don’t know whether to be happy the university has taken action or disgusted that this has ever happened. But of both I suppose.

You would think someone as intelligent and well educated as a university teacher would be aware that pornography or sexual abuse images/videos don’t prevent sexual attacks. It would be like saying oh if we show rapists rape videos they won’t rape people. It just simply doesn’t work like that at all.

@breadrollz

"arguing that pedophiles should be permitted to view child pornography as a 'harm reduction technique' or 'form of therapy' to help pedophiles 'maintain abstinence from sexual contact with children."

wtf

Also a bit confused as to how this individual doesn’t see that there’s a bit of a contradiction here. How do they suppose these images/videos are made while ‘abstaining from sexual contact with children?’

Surely they’re aware that somebody somewhere will be sexually abusing children to make the images, and that this idea would drive up demand (in an acceptable way presumably if it was allowed in law) and actually would result in more sexual abuse?

"Among some groups of predisposed individuals, easy access to a wide variety of engrossing and high-quality child pornography could serve as a substitute for involvement with actual victims,' Walker wrote."

Yes, imagine if some disadvantaged pedos had to watch low resolution kiddy porn with sloppy editing and wooden scripts! The indignity!

Don't underestimate the primal, visceral reaction of the majority of the general public against this. The Daily Mail is many things but not stupid.

@Doubletoilandtrouble

That is absolutely disgusting, recommending that creeps view images of child sexual abuse to “help the poor creeps MAPs feel better”.

To use a public position to push for child sexual abuse is awful. This is one of the situations where I actually do not believe in free speech.

I wonder if this person thought that their trans status would protect them?

Nope, free speech is fine, in fact it’s better to know who the creeps are and call them out.

But free speech has never meant freedom from consequences of that speech. Advocating for ‘map’ to access ‘high quality child pornography’ is inciting violence against children.

So this person should pay the professional cost and imho should face charges.

Free speech is a blanket rule, as is not having freedom from consequences of that speech of it breaks laws or harms people or breaks employment contract/policies (and gross misconduct can cover behaviour outside of work also in certain circumstances, like the above).