Richard Dawkins defends “mild pedophilia,” says it does not cause “lasting harm”

[The Straight Story]

In a recent interview with the Times magazine, Richard Dawkins attempted to defend what he called “mild pedophilia,” which, he says, he personally experienced as a young child and does not believe causes “lasting harm.”

Dawkins went on to say that one of his former school masters “pulled me on his knee and put his hand inside my shorts,” and that to condemn this “mild touching up” as sexual abuse today would somehow be unfair.

“I am very conscious that you can’t condemn people of an earlier era by the standards of ours. Just as we don’t look back at the 18th and 19th centuries and condemn people for racism in the same way as we would condemn a modern person for racism, I look back a few decades to my childhood and see things like caning, like mild pedophilia, and can’t find it in me to condemn it by the same standards as I or anyone would today,” he said.

Plus, he added, though his other classmates also experienced abuse at the hands of this teacher, “I don’t think he did any of us lasting harm.”

http://www.salon.com/2013/09/10/richard_dawkins_defends_mild_pedophilia_says_it_does_not_cause_lasting_harm/

[LiberalLoner]

1. I am going to barf

[TreasonousBastard]

2. FWIW, it was less than 15 minutes ago that someone else posted this in GD.

[The Straight Story]

5. Thanks, sorry, didn't see it (been in and out) I try to avoid dupes BUT

With so many people having others on ignore and never seeing their ops we just have to live it.

[dionysus]

3. ...say what? what prompted this shit?

[MineralMan]

4. Reprehensible of him to say that.

He speaks only for himself, by the way.

[The Straight Story]

6. Same with Pat Robertson and others (nt)

[MineralMan]

7. Yes. People make statements that reflect their personal

opinions, and are responsible for those statements. Nothing to do with anyone else, actually.

There's a long thread on this subject over in the Religion Group. As expected.

[The Straight Story]

8. Weird, why would it be there?

When it is not about religion.

[MineralMan]

11. Indeed.

There are many threads in the Religion Group about individual atheists doing something reprehensible. It seems as if atheism is supposed to be tarnished when an individual atheist does something wrong. I don't understand that kind of thinking, myself, but it's a popular meme in some circles. Certainly, people like the execrable Pat Robertson do not reflect Christianity.

It's puzzling, and that's why I don't participate in that Group, although I read it from time to time.

[The Straight Story]

12. To me it is someone well known, who likes attention, saying something assinine

Which can undermine their credibility (rightly or wrongly) on other issues (and could jeopardize their ability to seek out raising funds by speaking engagements).

It also removes any doubts some might have had about him being a jerk and a terrible spokes person for their cause.

[MineralMan]

16. Personally, as a strong atheist, I have never liked him as

a self-appointed spokesperson for atheism. He does not represent me. He represents himself, only, and has the book sales and speaking engagements he wants. But he does not speak for me at all.

In fact, he speaks for nobody but himself, as do we all.

[Duer 157099]

9. Considering that he was a victim of what he is describing

and that if he believes it didn't have lasting harm, then that's a good thing for him. To generalize, though, might be harmful. But letting other victims know that it's OK to not feel scarred for life might also be a good thing. I'm conflicted.

[MyshkinCommaPrince]

18. That was my thought, too.

I would like to read or listen to the full interview, rather than receive only the quotes selected by one new outlet/social commentator or another. There seems to be at least some ambiguity in his alleged statements, and the coverage may contain some spin or backlash.

[Brigid]

10. Dawkins is an ass.

That is all.

[Dr. Strange]

13. Uuuummmmmmm...what?

This kind of "mild" stupidity can cause lasting harm.

[Zorra]

14. I would never let my grandchildren go near anyone who expressed those beliefs. nt

[Blasphemer]

15. Absurd statements... very disappointing

We can indeed condemn people of an earlier era by today's standards. There is no "out" for racism, the slave trade, segregation, marital rape and all sorts of things that were once socially accepted. By that logic, we can't condemn the phenomena of child brides because such marriages are socially acceptable in cultures with different standards. Besides which, when it comes to child molestation, it may not have been openly discussed but it was in no way acceptable when he was a child. My great-grandmother alluded to experiences that made her very overprotective of her children and grandchildren. Dawkins is nuts.

[NaturalHigh]

17. Dawkins is an ass.

[Vashta Nerada]

19. He's gone off the deep end.

I used to admire him.

Now, not so much.

[Xithras]

20. Despite his intelligence, Dawkins fails to realize that "everybody is different".

I've discussed on DU the fact that I and my sister were molested as children, repeatedly and over a long period of time (and not "mildly" either).

I came to terms with it in my early 20's, moved on, and it really has had no effect on my life whatsoever...except maybe to make me slightly more watchful over my own children. I have normal long term relationships, express my sexuality in a healthy way, and have suffered no psychological problems from it since childhood. In my case, I can honestly say that it didn't do any long term damage.

My sister, on the other hand, has been a wreck. She's gone from relationship to relationship (currently divorcing husband #5) primarily because of her sexual promiscuity, and has battled depression and alcoholism since she was a teenager. Many of her problems trace directly to the fact that she was used as a sex toy for a pair of perverts for years. Even though she and I went through the exact same trauma (often at the same time together), it has had radically disparate impacts on our lives.

Everybody is different, and everybody reacts differently. I'm glad to hear that Dawkins was able to shrug off his own molestation so easily, but his statement utterly ignores the fact that HIS EXPERIENCE APPLIES TO NOBODY BUT HIMSELF. It was an irresponsible and poorly thought out comment, and if he's half as smart as he thinks he is, he'll offer an apology and a retraction.