'Mild Paedophilia Never Did Me Any Harm': Atheist Scientist Richard Dawkins Declares

[onehandle]

[IMG][/IMG]

Dawkins, 72, who is known for his strong religious criticism, said it was important to distinguish between varying levels of paedophilia, and that cases involving rape and murder should not be compared to 'mild touching up'.

In his autobiography, Professor Dawkins told how a master at his Salisbury prep school had pulled him on to his knee and put his hand inside his shorts', adding that other boys had been molested by the same teacher.

While he said that he had found the episode 'extremely disagreeable' he wrote: 'I don't think he did any of us any lasting damage.'

However his comments have provoked an angry reaction from child protection groups. The NSPCC’s Peter Watt told The Times: 'Mr Dawkins seems to think that because a crime was committed a long time ago we should judge it in a different way.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2416953/Richard-Dawkins-controversial-mild-paedophilia-comments.html

[Common Sense Party]

1. What an insensitive ass.

There's nothing "mild" about it.

[MattBaggins]

16. He was the victim and processed it in his own way.

But you go ahead and bash away

Bash the victim, how cute.

[cherokeeprogressive]

99. The FUCK he did: "I don't think he did any of US (caps mine) any lasting damage."

He processed it for EVERY BOY whose underwear the pedo freak invaded with his hands. In the meantime, he knew about a pedo freak, and said nothing. NOTHING.

[Fumesucker]

125. Keep in mind that incident happened probably sixty years ago or more

At that time molestation was definitely not spoken of, the culture both here and in the UK has changed greatly in the meantime. Notice that none of the other boys spoke up either. It would have been seen as kids making wild accusations against a respected member of the community (teachers actually were respected at that time).

I was molested by a "family friend" as a pre-teen and I never told anyone at all until I was in my late forties and I certainly don't feel guilty in the slightest for not speaking up, it would have hugely fucked up my already not all that great life if I had done so.

[Mariana]

151. I think a lot of people were in your position

My mom is about the same age as Dawkins. She was molested by her older brother. She spent her teenage years planning her days so as to avoid being alone in the house with him. When I asked her why she never told her parents or anyone else, she told me there was no way she could tell them. It just wasn't possible, she said.

My uncle moved thousands of miles away and we hardly ever saw him while I was growing up. The only reason my mom eventually told me about it was because I was going to visit my cousins, and he lived nearby so I would certainly see him. My mom told me so I'd take her seriously when she warned me never to be alone with him. If I hadn't made that visit, I still wouldn't know about it.

[Common Sense Party]

114. I'm not bashing him as a victim, I'm bashing him as someone who says pedophilia

is no big deal.

Straw men. How cute.

[mike_c]

30. you're blaming the victim....

Actually, I had a similar experience as a boy, and processed it in much the same way. It was unpleasant. I never went back to that guy's house again. But that was pretty much the extent of it. Dawkins is simply speaking his own truth, as I just have.

Want to blame me, too?

[Hassin Bin Sober]

37. I have three friends who all went to the same Catholic high school.

Well one is a good friend and the others are acquaintances .... But anyway.

We were out drinking one night last year and the subject came up of creepy Father so and so and how would keep some of them after school to wrestle AND feel them up. They were all having a laugh about it.

Maybe that's how they cope. Maybe they aren't bothered.

[ScreamingMeemie]

47. I would hope they would not presume to speak about how

other victims should cope.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

59. I guess if he did that he shouldn't. Did he do that?

[ScreamingMeemie]

62. 'I don't think he did any of us any lasting damage.'

'I don't think he did any of us any lasting damage.'

[quinnox]

2. and this guy is like a rock star to some atheists

What a creep.

[Logical]

3. I agree, this is creepy. But enjoy his books before I knew this. Smart man. Weird though. n-t

[Fumesucker]

6. Umm... could you make that *some* atheists?

Thanks..

[LisaLynne]

7. +1. nt

[quinnox]

8. I will, point taken

[Whisp]

48. what the FUCk!!!!!

you have some problems, man. really you do!

[ScreamingMeemie]

73. He is not a creep. He is a victim who has processed this in his

own way.

Religion/nonreligion aside, he is not a creep. I wish he had not spoken for those who are not himself, but he is definitely not a creep.

[gollygee]

4. Rape culture

Another example.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

5. Yes

[Shandris]

11. I dread saying this...

...but I don't understand how one person's idiocy is indicative of a culture -- particularly as regards a crime that gets people killed -constantly-. I'm not seeing where the connection is made...?

[gollygee]

13. Just one person?

I said he's an example. People often make comments about how various levels and types of sexual assault aren't that bad. It isn't just him.

[Shandris]

14. Okay, I see the angle you're coming from.

Thank you.

[cinnabonbon]

142. Yep.

[Katashi_itto]

9. Well that's it for Dawkins.

[Nye Bevan]

10. He's an ass. But of course he does not speak for all atheists (nt)

[Mariana]

55. He's not speaking for all victims of child molestation, either.

He's clearly only speaking for himself and the other victims he knew personally. Even then he says 'I don't think he did any of us any lasting damage.' He doesn't pretend to know for sure.

[boston bean]

12. The brilliant often lacking in common sense.

What a puke thing to say and think. blech!

[nadinbrzezinski]

15. I see this as coping behavior

and completely understandable given the society he grew up in.

These days what he experienced is sneered at. When he was a child, it was ignored, completely.

It's like bullying, the boys will be boys (that can kill) is now not as tolerated as it used to be.

That said, understanding does not mean I condone it, before somebody says such. That teacher (or his modern counterpart. that teacher is likely dead), should face the full legal consequences of that act.

[MattBaggins]

17. BASH THE VICTIM FOLKS

Have at it and show off that classy DU mentality.

[onehandle]

18. Dawkins is bashing countless victims. A 'mild touching up' ain't so bad.

Children should just get over it.

[JI7]

20. i don't think he said people should just get over it but speaking of his own

experience. it could be a way to help him deal with what happened.

[Whisp]

52. He is speaking for others, not for himself only:

'I don't think he did any of us any lasting damage.'

That is very very wrong.

[ZombieHorde]

135. Make shit up so you can put down a rape victim?

Damn.

[FrodosPet]

23. BASH THE VICTIMS DAWKINS

Have at it and show off that famous Dawkins arrogance.

Go ahead and minimize child abuse. And my loathing of you will deepen.

[Mariana]

49. It's sickening, isn't it? nt.

[loyalsister]

129. Also irresponsible

It's a disgusting and enabling statement.

[sabrina 1]

79. You mean like 'minimize the effects of molestation on children' as Dawkins just did?

[CoffeeCat]

130. Actually, Dawkins is aiding and abetting pedophiles...

I find Dawkins' words completely selfish and outrageous.

It's possible that Dawkins was able to shrug off what happened to him. If you've got a good support system
and loads of other advantages, and you've got genetics on your side and you're amazingly resilient--YES, you
may be able to rise above it. But that is IN SPITE of being molested. This outcome is very rare.

Most victims who are molested are traumatized. Believe me, I've met hundreds of victims. Many commit suicide. Many have eating disorders and addictions. Many struggle to hold down jobs. The list of their symptoms is painful and ongoing.

Also, Dawkins was not molested by a family member. Most molestation victims are preyed upon by members of the family. The damage this causes, for life, is untold. The pain is horrendous.

So, maybe because Dawkins was molested by someone not in the family and maybe because he coped in a rare way--he doesn't have any lasting effects.

However, the big problem is--his remarks make pedophilia and molestation sound not-that-bad. In a way, he is feeding into the flawed and sick processes of the pedophile--that their touching, their rapes, their fondling--doesn't hurt the victim. They like it. I wonder why Dawkins would play into this sick mentality--which hurts victims who suffer for life and also helps pedophiles to justify their crimes against children?

This is what is so sick. Why would Dawkins say these things? He harms untold numbers of victims, when he suggests that these crimes "really aren't that bad" and "cause no lasting effects." I mean really...what is he had talked about being mugged at gunpoint at a gas station and explained that he didn't have any lasting effect from it. Does that mean that anyone else who had been mugged at gunpoint should feel the same? It's like saying, "Buck up! I didn't have any lasting effects so maybe there's wrong with others who do!" He didn't say that, but it's practically suggested. And this hurts other victims!

He's a complete sack of shit for saying these things. He may be a "victim" as you said--but victims can say hurtful and damaging things. They can hurt others and cause pain, can't they? He doesn't deserve a free pass because he was molested. Jeffrey Dahmer was a victim. Was eating people for lunch, ok? Dawkins is a very intelligent, clever, man and he knows he is an influential public person to whom many respect.

He was reckless and selfish for saying these things.

[cinnabonbon]

143. This is a great comment.

Thanks for laying it out so eloquently.

[JI7]

19. Dawkins is the Victim here, he is speaking of what happened to him

[onehandle]

21. 'other boys had been molested' 'I don't think he did any of us any lasting damage.'

Not just him.

[JI7]

24. these are boys he knew, plus it could just be him trying to deal with it

[Xithras]

22. The truth, of course, is in the middle somewhere.

Dawkins claims that it's not harmful because he wasn't harmed by it. His statement (which he also made a few months back) is in response to the "common wisdom" that "mild pedophilia" is always harmful to the victim and causes permanent problems.

Like so many things, the truth lays somewhere in the middle. My sister and I were both molested by the same person at the same time. 30 years later she still has psychological issues from it. I don't. Same crime. Same time. Same perpetrator. Completely different outcomes. The truth is that every victim is different, and there are no hard and fast rules that apply to everyone. We punish molesters because it's ALWAYS a crime, and the children are ALWAYS victims. Bank robbery isn't less of a crime simply because the bank could "spare the cash". Molestation is a crime, and molesters must be punished, even if the child doesn't suffer serious harm. They don't get an "out" just because they chose their victim well.

Dawkins is fundamentally making the same mistake that many of the molestation victims opposing him tend to make. He is taking his personal experience, declaring it "normal", and then applying it to everyone else. With sexual crimes, you simply cannot do that. Everyone's "normal" is different.

[jollyreaper2112]

154. this is the kicker

Like so many things, the truth lays somewhere in the middle. My sister and I were both molested by the same person at the same time. 30 years later she still has psychological issues from it. I don't. Same crime. Same time. Same perpetrator. Completely different outcomes.

Exactly. It's like firing a gun into a crowd. Some people might be missed completely. I could get a grazing flesh wound. You could be paralyzed below the neck. I'd be an ass to ask why you're whining when I made a full recovery.

Molestation is wrong because it is an abuse of power where the other party cannot consent. Age of consent is an arbitrary line, yes, but the people arguing the hardest against it always seem to have an eye for the little ones. There's no reason why 18 is better than 17 and there are plenty of 20-somethings who aren't mature enough to handle sex but we drew a line somewhere.

I have a feeling a lot of the damage can be caused or compounded by how society reacts. Blaming the victim for being raped won't help the healing. Shaming them won't help. Pretending it never happened won't help.

[BuddhaGirl]

25. He's an asshole

"While he said that he had found the episode 'extremely disagreeable' he wrote: 'I don't think he did any of us any lasting damage.'

How the hell does he know that??

for insensitive assholery

[arcane1]

32. To be fair, he said "I don't think", not "I know for a fact"

It's his opinion regarding his own experiences. We can disagree with his statement but let's at least not rewrite it.

[BuddhaGirl]

35. "'I don't think he did any of us any lasting damage.'

It's insensitive. I'm not rewriting anything.

[liberal_at_heart]

26. I've been trashing the anti-religion threads, and this one will get trashed as well.

DU war threads are getting trashed from now on.

[hrmjustin]

27. Talk about a Wtf moment.

[mike_c]

31. no argument from me....

I had a similar experience as a boy, and regard the memories in much the same way.

[ScreamingMeemie]

39. You cannot possibly know that, unfortunately and sadly...

much as I believe Mr. Dawkins is speaking his own truth, I would wager that there are those here on DU who will process this statement from their own experience...from what they do indeed (and again unfortunately) know.

[ScreamingMeemie]

44. You need to take a break from DU tonight.

I am not a fucking moron. I am a mother who was once a child with my own life experiences that I bring to discussions.

And, smart phones mess up spelling all the time... You might want to think about that next time sir.

So, correction from Mr. Hawkins to Mr. Dawkins.

I hope your post is not alerted on because it shows how much damage one's childhood can do. I do hope you speak with someone about it someday. That kind of anger over a calm post is troubling.

[newcriminal]

81. A child who is molested

CAN NEVER BE A WILLING PARTICIPANT

That is a disgusting post, you do need some help.

[newcriminal]

84. That's not the help you need.

[newcriminal]

93. Since I can't respond to your post A Heretic I am

What a cowardly and underhanded person you are. Post vile disgusting messages and delete them right away to not have them hidden. You need more help than I thought. COWARD!!!

[Arcanetrance]

75. I know what it's like to be forcibly raped as a child and I find what Professor Dawkins said to be

disturbing. Pedophilia isn't a mild thing I'm glad he feels he's adjusted well to it and doesn't see it as a big deal. The way he phrased his thought he spoke for the group entirely some it may have had a bigger impact on they just didn't express it.

[intaglio]

29. Agreed he is a fool in regard of this but ...

At least 6 previous threads about this
Richard Dawkins defends ‘mild pedophilia’: Sept 11 2013
Richard Dawkins Defending 'Mild Pedophilia?' Sept 12 2013
Richard Dawkins Stirs Controversy for 'Mild Pedophilia' Remarks Sept 11 2013
Richard Dawkins under fire for ‘mild pedophilia’ remarks Sept 10 2013
Dawkins Says "Mild pedophilia doesn't do lasting harm," well here's my account: Sept 11 2013
Richard Dawkins speaks out on his child molestation comments. Sept 15 2013

DU provides a site search engine at the top right of every page - please use it

[onehandle]

33. Yeah, but that was in the past...

...the past does little harm to one according to this 'great thinker.'

[intaglio]

34. That is not the point, other DUers have done timely work on this

Please link to that work or it looks like you are trying to take sole credit.

[Fumesucker]

38. There's another "great thinker" who says that we should "look forwards and not backwards"

In particular this thinker makes this statement in regards to certain criminals who have already confessed to their crimes.

[newcriminal]

41. ok, I know what the fuck I am talking about.

He is a fool. An insensitive fool at that.

[Le Taz Hot]

144. Ah,but it's religion wars on DU now, don't 'cha know.

Previously it was "woo wars" and before that "gender wars." I swear there are disruptors here that purposely do this and WAAAAYYYY too many people blindly fall into this bullshit.

And now, I'm sure, we'll have to have 536 posts about the same damned thing. It REALLY makes DU suck.

[SidDithers]

45. Daily Mail. LOL...nt

Sid

[rug]

50. Are you also laughing at his quotes?

[SidDithers]

53. I'm laughing at how transparent this attempt to "get" Dawkins is...

Sid

[rug]

58. Somehow I doubt you're laughing.

[hrmjustin]

46. What is a "Mild touch up"?

[Mariana]

87. Copping a feel. Fondling. Inappropriate touching.

As opposed to, say, penetration or oral stimulation. Dawkins is saying that for him and his classmates, being groped wasn't as traumatic to them as being raped would have been.

He shouldn't be speaking for his classmates, even though he said "I think" rather than "I know" about the effects on them.

[hrmjustin]

88. Thanks.

[Mariana]

91. My husband is English, so I have a translator handy.

You're welcome.

[cherokeeprogressive]

101. "Copping a feel. Fondling. Inappropriate touching." Another word for it? MOLESTATION.

Question for you: Is there such a thing as RAPE, if PENETRATION doesn't occur? Say a pervert only makes contact, rubs it up and down a little, then reaches climax and goes limp and therefore can't achieve penetration?

"As opposed to, say,..." What? Inappropriate touching? His thing inappropriately touched hers. No penetration occurred. No rape. That about it?

[Mariana]

108. Of course it was molestation.

The poster asked what that particular phrase meant. I told him. I did not say or imply that Dawkins and his classmates weren't molested. However, if you like, I'll rewrite my post here:

Copping a feel. Fondling. Inappropriate touching. As opposed to, say, penetration or oral stimulation. Dawkins is saying that for him and his classmates, being groped wasn't as traumatic to them as some other forms of molestation would have been.

He shouldn't be speaking for his classmates, even though he said "I think" rather than "I know" about the effects on them.

[Hamlette]

51. Would the outcry here be different if it was someone besides Dawkins? Someone you admire?

Would you hate him if it was Obama who said this? Or Greenwald or whoever it is you admire?

I too had a similar experience. I can't help but think it would have been worse on me had I spoken out about it. We all want to get the perpetrator but sometimes the cost to the victim is very high.

I just wanted to a normal kid. I thought if I spoke up I would lose my anonymity, I would no longer be one of the group. I'd be the kid who got molested by that guy. I'm glad I said nothing. It was harmless.

[newcriminal]

54. It was not harmless.

You were harmed whether you admit that to yourself or not. The degree of harm might have been less than others, but that doesn't change the fact you were harmed.

[Hamlette]

68. and how is it that you know?

And, how is it that you know it would not have been worse had I told.

Fact is, you don't. And I do.

[newcriminal]

76. I know you were harmed because you admitted you didn't want to be known as the boy who was molested.

That obviously had to be hard. It was not harmless, and never is. As to knowing it would or not have been worse if you told, I never mentioned that. It very well might have been worse for you. You might have stopped him from doing it to someone else though, but at a young age most don't think about it that way. I certainly don't blame you for not telling.

[treestar]

56. It did do lasting damage, just because he does not want to face it

does not mean that it's not so, plus he's minimizing it happening to others! That's horrible. Oh, I suffered it and it wasn't so bad, implies he thinks other shouldn't complain either.

[Hamlette]

72. he does not imply others should no complain, and there is no way you can know it did lasting damage.

How is it there are so many sexual abuse experts on this board?

[treestar]

90. Of course it did lasting damage, how does that take an expert?

Good grief!

[Hamlette]

95. you think you know me better than I know myself? Good on ya.

what-the-fuck-ever

I worked with abused kids for years. Some were damaged, some were not.

[treestar]

134. So says the internet

They were all damaged if they suffered a thing like that. Maybe someone else should have been working with them.

[MellowDem]

74. Not according to him..

Unless you're trying to speak for the victim? I don't doubt that there are victims of pedophilia out there who didn't suffer long term damage, and I'll take their word for it, some people are able to process terrible things in different ways.

[treestar]

92. I would not take their word for it

How could such a thing not affect a person profoundly? Common sense, people. Of course it did him damage, and he won't face it, so that makes it worse.

[chungking34]

57. I like Dawkins, but this comment is in really poor taste

Pedophilia is one of the most vile ills of society, and cannot be excused in any form.

[catbyte]

60. What does being "an atheist" have to do with anything?

Seriously? After all the pedophile priests?!?

[rug]

64. What does "scientist" have to do with it? He calls himself both.

[Shankapotomus]

61. Dawkins' comments are being grossly taken out of context

I can't find the video where he said it but he basically said he was assessing his own abuse (not anyone else's) at the hands of a school master and in the sense that (I'm paraphrasing) "Who am I to complain about the one moment of abuse I was subjected to when there are so many others who have endured years, even decades of abuse?"

Wish I could find the video because I thought he handled the question quite sensitively and intelligently. But it was a question as part of an hour long interview on YouTube and there a millions of Dawkins interviews on there.

Edit: Here is a text answer (credit to DUer Rug) of Dawkins addressing this: http://www.richarddawkins.net/foundation_articles/2013/9/11/child-abuse-a-misunderstanding#

Why are you posting a story that occurred in September anyway?

[rug]

65. Here's his statement on what he calls a "misunderstanding".

http://www.richarddawkins.net/foundation_articles/2013/9/11/child-abuse-a-misunderstanding#

[Shankapotomus]

67. Thank you

That's what I was looking for ...though in video form. But this is more complete answer.

[rug]

70. You're welcome. I don't know why it has a Polish translation.

[Hissyspit]

121. Of course. And your post will be completely ignored.

[fujiyama]

63. Ewww... l just lost pretty much all respect I had for this guy.

I really liked his strong and clear stance on evolution being a scientific fact and his documentaries on evolution were pretty interesting.

But defending pedophilia to any degree is just bizarre and sick. I understand this is his perspective and this is perhaps how he has coped with this episode, but as a society we should never accept such behavior as a "mild touching up".

[fujiyama]

80. I know exactly what I'm fucking talking about

You must not have read my post. I admire Dawkins' work and I understand he has had to process this incident in his own way, but "a little feel up" is pretty damn serious and should not be dismissed so cavalierly. Dawkins may have done fine psychologically for the most part, but there are millions who are traumatized by that behavior.

[fujiyama]

85. You seem incapable of discussing this maturely

Goodbye.

[BlueStreak]

66. He does have a point about degree

But an adult putting his hand inside the pants of a young boy is a pretty serious act, in my book.

[Mariana]

89. Absolutely. Someone who does that

certainly has the potential to do much more.

[cherokeeprogressive]

102. Go ahead and explain to me the "Degrees of MOLESTATION". Explain it like I'm a child. n/t

[Electric Monk]

131. Ok, for the sake of discussion, let's define a scale from 1 to 10. 1 is just 'creepily' looking at,

and 10 is kidnapping, repeated rape, and murder.

Dawkins' case sounds like about a 4 on that scale (to me), and we should remember here that he was the child, not the perp.

[BlueStreak]

150. Exactly. It is childish to look at life as if there are only 2 choices on everything

Here's an example. When I was about 14, I went on a weekend youth retreat with a church. There was a young married couple that had just been hired as "Youth Ministers". Somehow they worked it out so that about a dozen of the kids (boys and girls) were alone with them in one of the cabins. They wanted to have a friendly rap session, it seemed. But the conversation kept moving more and more toward sexual matters, with talk of public hair, penis lengths and things like that. It was really bizarre.

Looking back, it is clear to me that they were hoping to find some kids where they could take it further. As far as I know they were not successful at that, but how would I know? I just know they didn't have their hands in my pants that night and somehow I survived without a lot of emotional damage, but I do still remember it clearly.

That's a 1 or 2 on the molestation scale.

[Vashta Nerada]

77. I admire Dawkins, but sometimes he says the stupidest shit.

[MellowDem]

78. This was news a while ago...

And also, having to cite to the Daily Mail is pretty sad.

Unfortunately, Dawkins could be a serial murderer, and it still wouldn't change the fact that his points on religion are generally right, or that the Catholic Church is a misogynist, homophobic institution based on a terrible belief system, and that the Pope is complicit with all of it.

Yet the Pope threads keep coming. Maybe this is a sign that the praise for the Pope isn't quite vociferous enough.

[rustbeltvoice]

94. the New York Mets won the 1969 World Series

Pope Paul VI celebrated the first Mass at a U.S. ballpark: Yankee Stadium, Oct. 4, 1965.

Pope John Paul II celebrated five Masses at baseball stadiums: in New York City in 1979, Oct. 2 at Yankee Stadium, and another Mass Oct. 3 at Shea Stadium; in 1987, Sept. 16 at Dodger Stadium in Los Angeles, and Sept. 18 at Candlestick Park in San Francisco; in 1995, at Camden Yards in Baltimore.

And that does not change that some people will always be anti-Catholic bigots.

But then again neither the popes, nor baseball has anything to do with the topic.

[MellowDem]

96. Oh, it has a lot to do with it I think...

The OP posts Pope praising threads all the time, and atheist bashing threads whenever he can, even trying to scrounge up old news from the Daily Mail.

And pointing out that Catholicism, by it's own official doctrine, is bigoted, is not anti-Catholic bigotry. That view is one based on cognitive dissonance and intellectual dishonesty, with some projection for good measure.

[SidDithers]

140. +1...nt

Sid

[rustbeltvoice]

155. gratuitive anti-catholic derangement syndrome

I thought this was a chat board for d/Democrats. This is encouraging bad will towards many, if not outright hatred.

We as Catholics are a quarter to a fifth of the population of the United States, and over a billion of souls about the world. We are not of one thought in theology, nor in politics, nor intensity of involvement, nor in devotion. We as Catholics do have a shared community, culture, and charity. This police trolling done by some individuals is metaphorical drive by shooting. It is also an attempt to put on notice that any one soft on "Catholicism" or on religion is to be chastised.

If this policing policy to attack Catholics were to become part of any political platform of a party that attacks so many people, that is a recipe for failure. And of the current pope: People sincerely like our Pope Francis because they see a loving man, whom shows himself lovable. Francis is a man of good will; i do not read you similarly.

I do not know the percentage of members here whom agree with your prejudice and bias; but is certainly against the spirit of civil discourse in a community. I do not remember seeing a disclaimer with the warning "No Catholics allowed".

I do not believe, we have anything in common to discuss. Go in peace.

[MellowDem]

156. If you want to back anything up you said...

Then have a discussion, otherwise your post is just a "drive by" as you put it.

It seems you take valid criticism of official Catholic doctrine personally. That's not rational. So you're attacking strawmen and acting the victim.

Given the positions the Catholic Church and the Pope take on many subjects, expect lots of criticism on a progressive board.

If you're offended and angry at that, but can't give a good reason why, then maybe you should examine if it's because you're wrong.

[rustbeltvoice]

160. not so mellow

[Orrex]

97. Am I understanding this? Dawkins was a molested as a child and calls it no big deal?

Well, isn't that up to him, ultimately?

[Mariana]

118. He made the mistake

of saying he believes other boys he knew, who were similarly molested, also weren't permanently damaged by it.

[Orrex]

146. Ah. Yes, that's different.

AFAIC he's free to feel however he wants to about his own experiences, but that doesn't give him any authority to declare how others feel about it.

[Mariana]

148. Well, he didn't really do that.

Here's the quote: 'I don't think he did any of us any lasting damage.' He's saying what he believes about how the others were affected, but he's not pretending to know for sure, and he's certainly not saying how they should feel about it.

[Orrex]

149. What the hell is wrong with my reading comprehension this morning?!?

Right there on the screen, and it wasn't making into my skull. Dammit!


I guess I'll fall back to "he might have made a more artful statement about it" and then back away slowly until my brain wakes up.

[Demo_Chris]

98. So it's cool to blame the victim if he's an atheist? WTF DU?

[Beearewhyain]

100. OK Let me see if I have this right

at least implied by some of the responses in the thread.

1) Person X is a prominent atheist with many people who agree with his statements on the subject of religion and woo
2) Person X made a questionable and offensive statement on an unrelated subject about which he has personal experience
3) Therefore, everything person X has said about anything should be disregarded and met with contempt
4) Anyone who has agreed with person X on anything else he has said agrees with person X on the unrelated statement

[cherokeeprogressive]

103. No, you don't have it right. Thanks for playing though. Don't forget your door prize.

[Beearewhyain]

105. Quaint

Care to explain?

[cherokeeprogressive]

106. Nnnnnnope.

[Beearewhyain]

107. I stand in awe of your rhetorical powers

All the Best!

[cherokeeprogressive]

116. Personally, I don't give a fuck what you stand in.

[Beearewhyain]

117. Has anyone told you that you are a charmer today?

Cause your charms are certainly workin' on me sweetie!

[ScreamingMeemie]

109. 1. Yes 2. Yes 3. No 4. No

Because I like Person X. I just don't like Person X speaking about how Person Y and Person Z feel about something they all had happen to them as children.

I hope I've cleared it up for you. It has nothing to do with the "religion/nonreligion" wars. I don't participate in them and I don't practice/nonpractice anything.

[JI7]

111. he said he shouldn't have said that

and this was months ago when he clarified what he said right after. hes aid he regretted speaking for others.

[ScreamingMeemie]

112. I am glad to hear that. I just want it to be known I don't do the religion thing or post veiled

responses or threads because I'm fighting some real or imagined battle with a group of people on the Internets. If that's what this is about, those who keep notes should just scratch my name right the hell out of their notebooks.

[Beearewhyain]

115. Thank You

A reasonable answer will always be met with appreciation and I think your answer is a reasonable one.

I too have generally avoided the "wars" but I found this thread (considering the source and date) to fall under #3 & #4 . That is not to say that all who responded think this way but it is the internet soooo...madness is always in mind.

Regardless, thanks for the response.

[Agnosticsherbet]

104. Rape is rape - child molestation is rape

Dawkins needs psychological counseling.

[WillowTree]

113. Love Dennis Miller or hate him, he has a great alter-ego group to NAMBLA.

North American My Balls Lack Attachment Assn.

I'll go along with that. Touch a child, pay a price. A painful one.

[hunter]

119. Some people are easily sunburned. Some are not.

Some will later get cancer from the sunburn and die.

Minds are like that too.

Not everyone will respond the same way to abuse.

Two soldiers in battle. One goes home with PTSD, one doesn't.

It's not the victim's fault, it's just the way it is.

Dawkins is an idiot for projecting his own experience on others. He's wrong, but not criminal.

The crime was committed by the molester.

[CFLDem]

120. ...

[ecstatic]

122. WTF? Considering that he remembers his emotions 65+ years later

I'm pretty fcking sure lasting harm was done, not to mention how out of touch he appears to be with regard to his own feelings.

[CrawlingChaos]

123. Richard Dawkins has been demonstrating he's a complete asshole for quite some time

I and others have long complained about his outrageous hatemongering toward Muslims - his irrational singling out of Muslims for dehumanizing attacks, blowing every racist dogwhistle in the book -- in addition to his disgusting sexist bullshit. Then came these stunning comments and I thought, oh, good, finally this fucker will be plunged into the obscurity he so richly deserves. Hasn't happened yet. How many times does this allegedly "brilliant" man have to show the world his ass before his fans stop making excuses for him?

[DonCoquixote]

124. let's not confuse issues

Dr. Dawkins, if we want to know about Genetics, we will read you.

But when it comes to psychology, stay out.

[SummerSnow]

126. Asshat...he probably touches boys and think its ok.

I see another Sandusky case coming

[Electric Monk]

132. Please log off the internet and don't post again, if that's what you got from this. nt

[CoffeeCat]

127. What a dumbass thing to say--Dawkins just lost his credibility

You know what pisses me off the most about this? This man has some interesting things to say. There are so many horrible people who use religion to justify bigotry, hatred, elitism and other kinds of pathology.

Dawkins is an intelligent man, who offers hope and intelligent words to those who are not believers. Because, when you reject organized religion--you are often bastardized and seen as a horrible, immoral person. So, people like Dawkins--who are wise, are needed to educate people and to let them know that rejecting organized religion does not mean you have horns and carry a pitchfork.

But that's all gone to hell now (no pun intended).

Dawkins just completely destroyed his credibility. He just provided religious people with fodder to destroy non-religious people. "See! We told you! These Godless punks are now saying that pedophilia is just fine and dandy!"

What a dumb fucking idiot he is.

(And never mind that his opinion is balderdash. He may have not experienced long-term damage from being molested, but an untold number of victims have. Many commit suicide. Many have eating disorders, addictions, problems with intimacy or even trusting anyone! Pedophiles always rationalize that the abuse doesn't harm their victims. They're delusional sick fucks. Dawkins should have never said these things, which only feeds into the warped denial systems of molesters who touch, fondle and enact sexual acts on underage victims).

SICK and STUPID all the way around, Dawkins!

[xfundy]

128. A man stuck his hand inside a kid's pants.

Of course it's sick, that goes without saying. But apparently it was somewhat common in the past.

And nobody talked about it, because it just wasn't talked about. That, and much, much worse that abusers did to kids, and it's highly likely the "worse" stuff, ie, going beyond touching to insertion or worse, fucked up a lot of peoples' lives permanently.

Relatively speaking, what he talked about was mild. RELATIVELY SPEAKING.

Thankfully, we're in an age where those who "feel up" a child are recognized as the sickos they are, and hopefully caught before they do worse. Because there's much worse molesters could do, up to and including killing a child so they don't tell. The corollary is "godly" molesters telling kids that God wants them to do it and Jesus will get them if they don't give in and will kill their families if they tell. That happens much more often.

Now, as a child, I also got felt up -- but it was by other child-boys, who I also felt up. It's kind of a given, as humans are curious, and boys take it to limits. I'm no psychologist, but the man who felt the kid up may have been trying to fulfill a part of growing up he was denied. NOT saying it's right, just a possible.

Flame away.

[CoffeeCat]

133. Well, if a grown man...

...feels that he wasn't felt up enough--he can try to right that with OTHER ADULTS.

There is NEVER, EVER any instance where it is ok for a grown adult to touch or act out sexually IN ANY way with a child.

There is never, ever any excuse to do that.

And I can't imagine any instance where a grown man would want to do that to a child--other than to exploit them or victimize them. Pedophilia really isn't about "getting off." People get confused by that. Yes, the acts are sexual in nature, but really--pedophiles HATE children. They are turned on by being sexual with them, but they get off because of the hurt it causes the child. They know they are violating innocence and they derive pleasure and a sense of warped power from taking innocence away.

So---this isn't some man trying to recapture something he missed out on in childhood. This was a predator who was attempting to destroy children and cause suffering in them.

Just so we're all clear on what pedophilia is and isn't.

[ZombieHorde]

136. The subject is so emotional for people that many don't even know what he said.

Many of these replies are just bizarre.

[Mariana]

139. They don't care what he said, either.

They don't care why he said it, or in what context, or that he's a victim of molestation himself, or any of that. Many of them don't even hate what Dawkins said. They hate Dawkins, and they did so long before they heard about this.

[ZombieHorde]

152. Probably. nt

[Comrade Grumpy]

159. Yup. n/t

[LeftishBrit]

137. This sort of attitude is not uncommon in older men who went to English 'public' schools

Most commonly it is used about corporal punishment - 'We got the cane every week, and it never did us any harm!'; but it can refer to any aspect of the hardships experienced: 'we were bullied'; 'we were away from our parents for months at a time from the age of 8'; 'we didn't have any fancy food'; 'we were cold in the winter'; 'we didn't get all this pampering that children get nowadays' - 'AND IT NEVER DID US ANY HARM'!

It is, I suppose, the common younger-generation-are-spoilt attitude - 'I walked ten miles to school in the snow every day, uphill in both directions!'; exaggerated by the fact that the boys' parents were in this case paying lots of money for the privilege of making their sons tough enough to rule the Empire (this is basically how it originated, though even by Dawkins' time there wasn't much of an Empire left); that this was seen as an important part of social status; and that the children were living much of the time in an enclosed environment, separated from their parents, from an early age.

It's a pity that Dawkins can't apply any of the scepticism to boarding-school practices that he does to religion; but I don't think he's actually recommending paedophilia!

[Demo_Chris]

138. Hitchens talked about this extensively in his autobiography. nt

[MindPilot]

147. I attended British public school.

Although it was roughly ten years after Dawkins which was a period of considerable reform and enlightenment. It was not boarding school, but still pretty rough. The threat of boarding school was the sword held over our heads to keep us in line; none of us wanted that.

[baldguy]

141. I was hesitant in clicking on this thread

Because I knew some religionists would deliberately fail to recognize Dawkins' position - he is at best merely uninformed on the subject, or at worst a victim in denial - and use it as an opportunity unfairly attack atheists.

I was sadly not disappointed.

[MindPilot]

145. When someone's first name is "Atheist"...

It is a pretty safe assumption the article is a hit piece.

[stevenleser]

153. Have no idea why someone would feel the need to say this. nt

[alp227]

157. So why are you posting this other than anti-atheist dog-whistle flamebait?

This is OLD NEWS - PZ Myers took this on back in September '13 when it originally happened.

[applegrove]

158. That's it. I'm done with him.